JOINT PROGRAMME 6.1 – TRANSITION FROM

HUMANITARIAN ASSISTANCE TO SUSTAINABLE

DEVELOPMENT

End-of-Programme Evaluation

Final Report

submitted to

UNDP Tanzania

by

Lovemore M. Zinyama

and

Slaus Mwisomba

July 2011 CONTENTS page ACRONYMS iii

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY v

1.0 INTRODUCTION 1 1.1 Background to the Joint Programme 6.1 1 1.2 Expected Results of the Joint Programme 6.1 1 1.3 UN Delivering as One (DaO) 3 1.4 Purpose of the Evaluation 4 1.5 Structure of the Report 5

2.0 EVALUATION METHODOLOGY 6 2.1 Introduction 6 2.2 Review of Documents 6 2.3 Evaluation Work Plan 6 2.4 Development of Data Collection Tools 7 2.5 Interviews with Key Informants 8 2.6 Field Visits to Activity Sites 8 2.7 Focus Group Discussions with Community Leaders and Beneficiaries 9 2.8 Limitations of the Evaluation 9

3.0 KEY OUTPUTS OF THE JOINT PROGRAMME 6.1 11 3.1 Introduction 11 3.2 Key Outputs of the Joint Programme 6.1 11 3.2.1 Education 11 3.2.2 Health 14 3.2.3 Land Use Planning 16 3.2.4 Capacity Development in the LGAs 17 3.2.5 Child Protection 18 3.2.6 Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) 18 3.2.7 Border and Migration Controls 19 3.3 Where was the JP 6.1 Less Successful? 20

4.0 PROGRAMME RELEVANCE, EFFICIENCY, IMPACTS, SUSTAINABILITY AND PARTNERSHIPS 21 4.1 Introduction 21 4.2 Relevance of the JP 6.1 21 4.3 Programme Efficiency and Effectiveness 23 4.4 Programme Outcomes/Impacts 26 4.4.1 Programme Impacts on the Quality of Health Services 26 4.4.2 Programme Impacts on the Quality of Education 27 4.4.3 Programme Impacts on WASH 28 4.4.4 Protection of Vulnerable Groups 29 4.4.5 Programme Impacts on LGA Capacity for Planning, M&E and Gender Mainstreaming 30 4.4.6 Programme Impacts on Migration Procedures and Controls 31 4.5 Sustainability of Programme Outputs and Outcomes 32

i 4.6 Partnerships and Coordination 34 4.6.1 National and Regional Level Coordination 34 4.6.2 One UN Joint Team 34 4.6.3 Cluster Working Groups 36 4.6.4 District and Regional Level Coordination 37 4.6.5 Overall Assessment of DaO under the JP 6.1 37 4.7 Cross-cutting Issues 38

5.0 CONCLUSION, LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS 42 5.1 Conclusion 42 5.2 Lessons Learned 42 5.3 Recommendations 43 5.3.1 Recommendation for the GoT 44 5.3.2 Recommendations for the UN in Tanzania 44

APPENDICES 1: Terms of Reference 46

2: Work Plan 55

3: Evaluation Matrix 58

4: Persons Interviewed 64

5. Key Outputs of the Joint Programme 6.1, by District and Cluster 67

TABLES 1: JP 6.1 objectives and key results 2

2: JP 6.1 coordination meetings of the One UN Joint Team held in Kigoma 35

TEXT BOXES 1: Who is the beneficiary? - Mkugwa Girls High School, Kibondo District 22

2: Programme relevance - Lugufu Girls Secondary School, Kigoma District 23

3: Programme efficiency – “Delivering as One” requires commitment, inter-agency communication and coordination 25

4: Programme impact - land use planning in Nyakaiga Village, Karagwe District 31

5: Sustainability of programme outputs - challenges of implementing the new primary school curriculum 33

ii ACRONYMS

ACSEE Advanced Certificate of Secondary Education Examination AIDS Acquired Immuno-Deficiency Syndrome CCRO Certificate of Customary Right of Occupancy CFSVA Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerability Analysis CHMT Council Health Management Team CVL Certificate of Village Land DaO Delivering as One DC District Commissioner DED District Executive Director DHMT District Health Management Team DRC Democratic Republic of Congo EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EPI Expanded Programme on Immunization FACE Fund Authorisation and Certification of Expenditure FAO Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations FDC Folk Development College GoT Government of Tanzania HIV Human Immuno-deficiency Virus HMIS Health Management Information System HRBA Human Rights Based Approach ILO International Labour Organisation IMCI Integrated Management of Childhood Illnesses IOM International Organisation for Migration IP Implementing Partner JP Joint Programme JSC Joint Steering Committee LED Local Economic Development LGA Local Government Authority LGRP Local Government Reform Programme MA Managing Agent M&E Monitoring and Evaluation MCH Maternal and Child Health MDA Ministry, Department, Agency MDG Millennium Development Goal MoU Memorandum of Understanding MTEF Medium Term Expenditure Framework MVC Most Vulnerable Children NPA Norwegian People’s Aid NSGRP National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty (MKUKUTA) NWT Northwestern Tanzania OPD Outpatients Department PHC Primary Health Care PITC Provider-Initiated HIV Testing and Counselling PMTCT Prevention of Mother-to-Child Transmission of HIV PMO-RALG Prime Minister’s Office – Regional Administration & Local Government PUN Participating UN agency RAS Regional Administrative Secretary RBM Results based management

iii RC Regional Commissioner RHMT Regional Health Management Team SIDO Small Industries Development Organisation TOR Terms of Reference TOT Training of Trainers TTC Teacher Training College UN United Nations UNCDF United Nations Capital Development Fund UNDAF United Nations Development Assistance Framework (2007-2010) UNDAP United Nations Development Assistance Plan (July 2011 – June 2015) UNDP United Nations Development Programme UNEP United Nations Environment Programme UNESCO United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation UNHCR United Nations High Commission for Refugees UNICEF United Nations Children’s Fund UNIDO United Nations Industrial Development Organisation VTC Vocational Training Centre WASH Water, sanitation and hygiene WFP World Food Programme WHO World Health Organisation

iv EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. Background to the Joint Programme 6.1

Northwestern Tanzania (NWT) has historically hosted refugees from Burundi, Rwanda and the DRC fleeing from internal conflicts in their countries from as early as 1972. Their number peaked during the mid-1990s when there were over 500,000 refugees in 13 camps spread across the two regions of Kigoma and Kagera. The large-scale humanitarian operation, established in response to the massive refugee influxes, has had an impact on the social and economic development of the area. As the withdrawal of humanitarian support would have considerable repercussions and consequences on the local economy of the districts that hosted the refugee camps, a joint UN programme which aimed at supporting the Regional and Local Government Authorities to address the transition from the humanitarian aid environment to sustainable development was developed during 2007-2008. It had been planned to start in July 2008, but actual implementation only started in January 2009. The Joint Programme 6.1 was implemented in the five districts of Kigoma, Kasulu, Kibondo (in Kigoma Region), Ngara and Karagwe (in Kagera Region). In addition to district- specific activities, the programme also provided capacity development support at the district and regional levels in both Kigoma and Kagera Regions. The three-year programme ended on 30 June 2011.

The JP 6.1 was organised around three thematic clusters which were aligned to the Government of Tanzania (GoT)’s development goals as defined in its National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty (MKUKUTA, the KiSwahili acronym). The strategy identifies three major clusters, viz (i) growth and reduction of income poverty; (ii) improvement in the quality of life and social well-being, and (iii) good governance.

An internal division of labour provided for selected Participating UN agencies (PUNs) to coordinate activities within these clusters in line with their areas of technical expertise. The selected cluster lead agency was responsible for consolidating cluster work plans, progress reports, and requests for funds, in collaboration with other PUNs and Implementing Partners (IPs) in the cluster that it was coordinating.

As the three-year programme was coming to an end, UNDP, as the Managing Agent, contracted two independent external consultants to conduct an end-of-programme evaluation of the JP 6.1.

2. Purpose of the Evaluation

The purpose of the evaluation was to assess the achievements (outputs and outcomes) of the Joint Programme 6.1 in Northwestern Tanzania since its commencement. More specifically, the evaluation aimed to: (i) assess the appropriateness, relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability of the JP 6.1 outputs and achievements; and (ii) identify lessons learned and draw conclusions which could inform other interventions and which could contribute to decision making processes of the UN, Government of Tanzania (GoT) and other development partners.

v 3. Evaluation Methodology

The evaluation was conducted during the months of May and June 2011. A multi- pronged approach was used for information gathering, including  Reviewing key programme documents;  Development of data collection tools (evaluation matrix, interview guides and focus group discussion guides);  Conducting interviews with key informants in the PUNs and the participating LGAs and MDAs, both in Dar es Salaam and in the two regions of Kigoma and Kigera;  Conducting focus group discussions with community leaders and beneficiaries in the five districts; and  Field visits to some of the activity sites in all five districts.

4. Key Outputs of the Joint Programme 6.1

Despite problems and delays experienced at the beginning, the programme has produced remarkable outputs that are already benefiting the communities and local authorities in the two regions. The major outputs of the programme are summarised in the following paragraphs.

Outputs for Enhancing the Quality of Education:  Construction of new buildings and rehabilitation of existing structures at the former refugee camps and their conversion into five new secondary schools, together with support facilities such as water, solar power, latrines, dormitories, dining rooms, kitchens and staff houses. The schools have also been provided with libraries, laboratories and science kits. Three of the schools were already operational at the time of the evaluation while the other two were expected to enrol students in time for the 2011-2012 school year. A sixth is a pre-existing community school that was supported through the construction of boarding facilities.  In-service training for some 138 secondary school teachers, for instance on diagnostics teaching methods, teaching of science, HIV/AIDS and life skills.  In-service training and capacity development for over 300 primary school teachers, ward and district education officers, tutors and teachers of children with special needs.  Procurement and distribution of teaching and learning materials for primary schools, including 19,872 supplementary reading materials and 300 desks, materials for children with special needs such as Braille machines, hearing aids, sun glasses for persons with albinism.  Training and capacity development for 102 tutors from VTCs and FDCs in solar power installation maintenance, and procurement of teaching and learning materials for those vocational institutions, including sewing machines for dress-making classes, planes and saws for carpentry classes.

Outputs for Enhancing the Quality of Health Services  Construction on new buildings and rehabilitation of existing structures and their conversion into four new health facilities. The facilities are provided with solar power, water, ablution facilities, incinerators, OPD and MCH facilities

vi and equipment. Wards, dining rooms and kitchens have been constructed for in-patients at some of the health facilities.  Provision of one ambulance and radio communication equipment per district in order to strengthen the referral system.  Procurement and distribution of MCH equipment to health facilities and for them to provide PMTCT.  Procurement and distribution of standard treatment guidelines for communicable diseases, i.e. malaria, TB, HIV/AIDS.  In-service training of health workers, ward, district and regional health officers in order to enhance their capacity to deliver improved health services: 253 were trained on high impact interventions for child survival, including PMTCT and PITC, infant and child feeding (199 personnel trained), emergency obstetrics and neonatal care (50), EPI and implementation of the “Reaching Every Child” immunisation programme (206 health workers trained).  Awareness raising and training of village leaders on PMTCT, EPI, and prevention of paediatric AIDS and for traditional birth attendants on the importance of delivery at health facilities.

Land use Planning The JP 6.1 facilitated land use planning in some 20 pilot villages in the five districts in support of the orderly re-population of the former refugee camps. The development of land use maps that are registered with the Commissioner for Lands is aimed at reducing disputes over land. Staff of the local authorities, as well as village and ward leaders, were trained on participatory land use planning, environmental legislation, the legislative requirements for EIAs, and resolution of land disputes. Equipment for land survey and mapping was procured for the districts and their staff trained on its use.

Capacity Development for the LGAs Staff of the LGAs in the two regions, from regional to ward and village levels, were trained in several areas in order to enhance governance, participatory development planning, gender mainstreaming, and environmental management. A human rights- based approach and results-based management were central to the capacity development initiatives of the JP 6.1. Because of the training, LGA officials, from village and ward leaders to district and regional government officers are now more aware of their responsibilities towards the rights of others, exemplified by such actions and decisions as the provision of nutritional support to HIV/AIDS patients, the inclusion of women in training and decision-making committees, protection of MVCs, and awareness of the rights of asylum seekers.

Child Protection The JP 6.1 also supported the strengthening of child protection mechanisms in the target districts. These include the establishment of village MVC committees and training of committee members, awareness raising about child abuse among both school pupils and the communities, training of school teachers, community leaders and LGA officers, as well as the provision of teaching and learning materials for children with special needs.

vii Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) WASH were addressed both at the new schools and health facilities provided under the JP 6.1 as well as in the wider communities. Some of the activities included the installation of water points for use by villagers living adjacent to the new schools and health facilities, training of local artisans in the construction of latrines and maintenance and repair of water pumps, and the construction of latrines and hand- washing facilities at several schools.

Border and Migration Controls The JP 6.1 also provided support for the strengthening of border and migration management in the two regions. Equipment procured for improved migration procedures include electronic passport and finger print readers, computers and radio communication systems. Immigration and police buildings were refurbished and solar power installed into them. Immigration officials, the police as well as community leaders were trained on migration management and the protection of asylum seekers. Awareness raising within the communities on human trafficking was conducted through radio programmes.

5. Programme Relevance

The programme was designed so that outputs and outcomes addressed the three clusters under the national poverty reduction strategy, MKUKUTA. A participatory planning process served to enhance the relevance of the programme to communities in the target districts. Activities for implementation were discussed and agreed with the IPs (i.e. the respective district councils, regional governments and MDAs) in joint planning meetings. The product of these meetings, an annual work plan, was endorsed and signed by the Permanent Secretary in the PMO-RALG on behalf of the GoT and by the Country Director for UNDP (the Managing Agent) on behalf of the UN.

6. Programme Efficiency and Effectiveness

A feature of the JP 6.1 was that the IPs were government institutions at national, regional and district levels. The use of these already existing government structures meant that the programme did not need to establish new or parallel structures that would be responsible for implementation of planned activities.

Recurrent costs of using these government structures and staff were borne by the GoT through the normal budget allocations for staff salaries, transport and fuel, per diems and consumables. This means that almost the entire funds allocated to JP 6.1 activities went towards actual implementation of activities and not to cover recurrent expenses.

The IPs used the normal government procurement systems where goods and services were required. In most instances, contractors from within the two regions were used, especially for the construction and rehabilitation of buildings in the former refugee camps. Likewise, other service providers such as training facilitators and land surveyors were usually contracted from within the two regions. Mobilisation costs would be lower for local contractors than for those from more distance

viii locations such as Dar es Salaam. Thus, the use of local contractors went a long way to reduce procurement costs for goods and services.

The requirements for rehabilitation ensured that permanent structures were constructed that meet normal government standards, as were the furniture and fittings, equipment and other supplies.

However, it is also possible that the delays experienced by the IPs in the disbursement of funds through the Treasury, especially during the early part of the programme, adversely affected programme efficiency. Although some IPs were able to pre-finance their planned activities from other votes, this was not always feasible in all cases and would require prior authorisation by the District Council’s Finance Committee. Second, the transfers of staff within the IPs to other departments or re- deployment to other duties also worked against programme efficiency.

7. Programme Outcomes

Cluster 1 was supposed to address issues pertaining to employment creation, agri- processing and market improvement, and generally strengthening local economic development initiatives. From the information gathered during the evaluation, Cluster 1 faced obstacles that resulted in failure to attain the planned outcomes. Several activities initially planned for implementation under Cluster 1 were subsequently cancelled. There were delays in the procurement, installation and commissioning of equipment, and in identification of both beneficiary groups and activity sites for the proposed agro-processing plants. As a result, the proposed pilot agro-processing plants were still non-operational at the time of the evaluation. The results of both the value chain analysis of priority commodities with potential for market creation and agro-processing and the food security and vulnerability analysis were still to be translated into actionable interventions that would benefit the communities.

In contrast, outputs under Clusters 2 and 3 can be expected to make significant impacts on the lives of the target communities and LGAs. a) The quality of health services has been enhanced in several ways such as (i) improved access to health facilities as a result of the establishment of new facilities at the former refugee camps, (ii) better trained health personnel because of the in-service training they received, (iii) better equipped health facilities, (iv) standardisation of treatment following the procurement and distribution of treatment guidelines to health facilities, (v) an improved referral system because of the procurement of ambulances and radio communication equipment, (vi) improved management and planning of the health delivery system as a result of training and capacity development of the CHMTs and RHMTs. b) The quality of education has also been enhanced with (i) the addition of five new secondary schools, (ii) better trained teachers, (iii) improved supervision and inspection of schools, and (iv) improved availability of teaching and learning materials. The programme has also contributed to greater educational opportunities for girls through the establishment of girls only secondary schools, as well as supporting those schools towards the teaching

ix of science subjects. Finally, it has also enhanced the quality of learning and teaching for children with special needs. c) The outputs supported by the JP 6.1 under WASH have contributed towards (i) a reduction in the incidence of water-borne diseases, (ii) improved access to safe water for the communities and school children, and (iii) improved sanitation both in the schools and the target communities. d) The capacity of the LGAs and the communities to provide protection for MVCs has been enhanced. There is greater awareness of the need for child protection among children, villagers and local leaders. e) The capacity of local leaders in the village and wards, officials of the district councils and regional governments has been enhanced for participatory planning, resolution of disputes, environmental management and gender mainstreaming. Among other things, their enhanced capacity will be evident in future through (i) reduction in land disputes, (ii) gender mainstreaming in district plans and budgets, and (iii) enhanced environmental management. f) Finally, anticipated impacts on migration and border controls include (i) reduction in illegal migrations, (ii) improved security for communities in border regions, (iii) more accurate documentation of legal migrants and (iv) improved observance of the rights of asylum seekers.

8. Sustainability of Programme Outputs and Outcomes

The communities in NWT will to continue benefiting from the outputs of the JP 6.1 only if the regional and district authorities can secure financial support for them on a long-term basis. The sustainability of the outputs and achievements of the programme will depend on the ability of the target districts (i) to obtain adequate funds from the Treasury to meet the recurrent costs of running and maintaining those outputs that are already operational (which is the majority), as well as recruiting and retaining qualified staff to work in the five districts, and (ii) to obtain funds to finish and bring into operation those activities that were still to be completed. Examples of the latter problem include the shortage of science teachers without which the laboratories at the new high schools remain unutilised; new libraries that do not have books; or a health facility that cannot be opened because it lacks an incinerator. Overall, the IPs stressed that they were taking measures to ensure that the JP 6.1 outputs were incorporated within their MTEFs.

9. Cross-cutting Issues

The JP 6.1 also addressed all the cross-cutting issues that the UN in Tanzania has incorporated in the design of its joint programmes, namely (i) gender equality, (ii) human rights-based approach, (iii) environmental sustainability, (iv) results-based management and (v) capacity building. These cross-cutting issues were addressed in the planning, implementation and monitoring of programme activities with the IPs.

10. Compliance to the DaO

The planning and implementation of the JP 6.1 was also done in such a manner that it complied with principles of the UN Delivering as One. Performance of the programme in this regard was assessed in accordance with the DaO process indicators. Thus, three-quarters of the JP 6.1 support was reported through the

x government budget for 2010; 75% of the JP 6.1 budget was channelled through the Exchequer in 2010; all procurement was done using the national public procurement system; and all IPs were using FACE to report on activities and to request for disbursement of funds.

11. Lessons Learned

There are several lessons to be drawn from the experience of the Joint Programme 6.1.

Linkages with LGAs  The use of existing government structures and local development plans contributed to ensuring ownership of the programme by the LGAs and the beneficiary communities. It set the LGAs on the road to implementing on their own the transition from a humanitarian aid environment to sustainable development.  The statutory role of the Regional Administrative Secretariats as overseers and coordinators of development in districts under their jurisdiction was not adequately recognised by the JP 6.1. There was a tendency to view the office of the RAS as just another IP, on par with the district councils.  There was need for structured consultation mechanisms between the UN and the LGAs in the form of the Regional Forums.

Programme Planning  The absence of a project document setting out the programme’s objectives and targets resulted in a lack of continuity due to the constant change of activities such that what was planned at inception was not necessarily followed through to the end of the programme. There was need for an agreed and approved project document elaborating the operational modalities, division of responsibilities especially between the PUNs and the MA for accountability purposes, reporting channels as well as M&E arrangements.  Experience from the JP 6.1 showed the importance of closely aligning development assistance with the annual planning cycle of the different levels in the governmental hierarchical structure. Both the GoT and development partners should ensure that the disbursement of funds takes place at a time in the planning cycle when the IPs are best able to implement the agreed activities.

Coordination and Partnerships  The number of stakeholders involved in the JP 6.1 was large and this entailed a substantial demand on coordination. There is need for more streamlined programmes in the future.  Delivering as One on future joint programmes is going to require significant review of the traditional operational modalities of the different UN agencies and a change of mindsets. For instance, some agencies have a tradition of working at community level and, for them, the transition from single-agency work to multi-agency partnerships under JP 6.1 was relatively easier. The presence of these PUNs in Kigoma was a contributing factor for the success of the JP 6.1. Other agencies have traditionally worked at higher, national

xi policy, levels and the requirements of JP 6.1 to work at district and community levels presented major challenges.

Capacity Development  Although capacity development has been done in several ways, the predominant modality was through out-of-office workshops and seminars. There is concern that excessive use of this modality inhibits internalisation of the newly acquired skills through learning by doing. There is need to identify new and innovative approaches to capacity building that enable the trainees to internalise their new skills, for instance through some form of on-the-job mentoring.

12. Recommendations for the GoT

The following recommendations are directed at the Government of Tanzania and its regional and district authorities. (i) In future, the GoT should ensure that each new programme has an agreed and endorsed project document with an adequately comprehensive M&E framework.

(ii) There is need for the GoT to quickly secure funds from internal resources or from DPs and to ensure that those outputs that have not yet been completed and are not yet operational are brought into use as soon as possible.

(iii) There is need for the Treasury to review its procedures for disbursements to the IPs so that funds are received more quickly in order to avoid delaying in implementation of planned activities.

(iv) The relevant planning authorities in the GoT should review the effectiveness of the current approaches to capacity development and consider adoption of alternative modalities besides the standard workshops and seminars. One possibility is on-the-job mentoring by technical experts/facilitators provided for short periods (e.g. reviewing development plans and budgets for gender mainstreaming with a district’s planning officers over a couple of days at their workplace). This will help the staff to internalise and put into practice their new skills and knowledge.

(v) At present, there is little to show recognition of the contribution by the UN to the transition from a humanitarian aid environment to sustainable development in NWT. The GoT should consider ways of publicly acknowledging that contribution. This may be in the form of plaques on the walls of buildings constructed with JP 6.1 support or at the main entrances (gates) to the schools and health facilities.

13. Recommendations for the UN in Tanzania

The following recommendations are directed at the UN in Tanzania, including the PUNs.

xii (i) In future, the UN should ensure that the statutory coordination and supervisory role of the regional administrative structures is appropriately recognised. They should not be viewed primarily as any other IPs. Inclusion of the RAS will also contribute to ensuring LGA ownership and sustainability of planned activities.

(ii) In future, the UN should ensure that each new programme has a project document agreed and signed with the GoT and that the document includes an adequately comprehensive M&E framework.

(iii) There is need for the UN to develop a short-term strategy to support the completion of those outputs that are not yet operational where the IPs have not been able to secure the necessary resources to bring them into use. This is the time (following the recent publication of the national 2011/2012 budget) for the UN to discuss with the LGAs, assess the remaining resource requirements to bring those outputs into use, what has been allocated for their completion by the Treasury, and agree on what further resources are required from the UN.

(iv) The evidence suggests that the development needs of NWT are enormous and cannot be addressed within the framework of a three-year transitional support programme. As a longer term strategy, the UN should continue to include NWT as a priority area for assistance under the new UNDAP (2011- 2015).

(v) However, future programmes should be less ambitious than the just ended JP 6.1 and should be more focused in both scope and anticipated outcomes as well as in the number of stakeholders directly involved with implementation.

(vi) The UN should engage the Treasury in finding ways of speeding up procedures for disbursement of funds to IPs in order to avoid delaying the implementation of planned activities.

(vii) The UN needs to review its approach to capacity development for IPs, with less emphasis on the workshops and seminars. One possibility is on-the-job mentoring by technical experts/facilitators provided for short periods (e.g. reviewing development plans and budgets for gender mainstreaming with a district’s planning officers over a couple of days at their workplace). This will help the staff to internalise and put into practice their new skills and knowledge.

(viii) For future Joint Programmes, the participating UN agencies should be seen to be Delivering as One at all times. There is need to review and strengthen mechanisms for joint monitoring, joint missions to the IPs, and speaking with one voice rather than as individual agencies.

xiii 1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Background to the Joint Programme 6.1

Northwestern Tanzania (NWT) has historically hosted refugees from Burundi, Rwanda and the DRC fleeing from internal conflicts in their countries from as early as 1972. Their number peaked during the mid-1990s when there were as many as 500,000 refugees in 13 camps spread across the two regions of Kigoma and Kagera. As of mid-2011, some 98,000 refugees from the DRC and Burundu remained in two camps in Kasulu District. The large-scale and prolonged humanitarian operation has had an impact on the social and economic development of the area. As the withdrawal of humanitarian support would have considerable repercussions and consequences on the local economy of the districts that hosted the refugees, a joint UN programme which aimed at supporting the Regional and Local Government Authorities to address the transition from the humanitarian aid environment to sustainable development was developed during 2007-2008. It had been planned to start in July 2008, but actual implementation only started in January 2009. The Joint Programme 6.1 was implemented in the five districts of Kigoma, Kasulu, Kibondo (in Kigoma Region), Ngara and Karagwe (in Kagera Region). In addition to district- specific activities, the programme also provided capacity development support at the district and regional levels in both regions.

The JP 6.1 built on previous humanitarian interventions in NWT supported by several UN agencies. The forerunner of the JP 6.1 was the joint Human Security Programme 2006-2008 which entailed UNDP, FAO, UNIDO, UNICEF, UNHCR and WFP supporting refugee hosting communities.

1.2 Expected Results of the Joint Programme 6.1

The Joint Programme 6.1 was organised around three thematic clusters which were aligned to the Government of Tanzania (GoT)’s development goals as defined in its National Strategy for Growth and Reduction of Poverty (MKUKUTA, the KiSwahili acronym). The strategy identifies three major clusters of poverty reduction outcomes, viz (i) growth and reduction of income poverty; (ii) improvement in the quality of life and social well-being, and (iii) good governance. As explained in the poverty reduction strategy (p. 28), there is a strong relationship between the three clusters. Growth leads to higher incomes, thus reducing income poverty, assuming equitable distribution. Higher incomes enable households to improve human capabilities through better education, health, nutrition and shelter, i.e. social well-being. Governance, on the other hand, provides conditions within which growth, social well- being and poverty reduction can take place.

An internal division of labour provided for selected Participating UN agencies (PUNs) to coordinate activities within those clusters in line with their areas of technical expertise. The cluster lead agency was also required to be based in Kigoma. The selected cluster lead agency was responsible for consolidating cluster work plans, progress reports, and requests for funds, in collaboration with other PUNs and the Implementing Partners (IPs) in the cluster that it was coordinating. Thus, WFP was the lead agency for Cluster 1, UNICEF led Cluster 2 while Cluster 3 was led by UNDP. A representative of each cluster lead agency was based in NWT and was

1 supposed to work in close collaboration with the Programme Manager appointed by UNDP, the programme’s Managing Agent (MA).

The key results that the Joint Programme 6.1 aimed to achieve are summarised in Table 1 which also shows the participating UN agencies in each cluster.

Table 1: JP 6.1 objectives and key results

Cluster 1: Wealth Creation and Income Generation

Overall cluster objective: Strengthen stakeholders’ capacity in the two regions for economic planning, employment creation, agriculture and market improvement Key results PUNs 1. Systems and procedures as well as facilitating conducive environment for WFP (lead), ILO, local economic development initiatives enhanced UNCDF 2. Food security initiatives promoted and supported WFP, FAO 3. Small scale agro-food processing technologies addressed to organised ILO, UNCDF, FAO, groups improved WFP, UNIDO Cluster 2: Social Services

Overall cluster objective: Stakeholders’ access in target districts improved in basic PHC services, knowledge of key health practices, standard malnutrition treatment and improved household water and sanitation, and quality education – also through the increased benefits received from the transfer of the assets from the refugee camps to the LGAs Key results PUNs 1. Capacity of LGAs to deliver quality primary health care services enhanced UNICEF (lead), WHO 2. Comprehensive management of major communicable diseases (TB, WHO, UNICEF HIV/AIDS, malaria and others) strengthened in target districts 3. Quality education in target districts improved UNESCO, UNICEF 4. Community capacity to manage water sources and improve household UNICEF water management enhanced 5. Improved and converted assets in the former refugee camps for delivery UNHCR of social services undertaken 6. Access to care, support, protection and HIV prevention services for UNICEF vulnerable groups including MVCs enhanced Cluster 3: Governance and Natural Resources Management

Overall objective: Government capacity is strengthened in planning and analysis, border management, conflict management, sustainable use of natural resources and rule of law and gender aspects Key results PUNs 1. Planning and M&E capacity at regional and district level strengthened with UNDP (lead) particular emphasis on gender sensitive budgeting and implementation 2. Management of migration and immigration procedures and infrastructure IOM, UNHCR improved 3. Sustainable management of natural resources and conflicts enhanced in UNDP target areas 4. Access to justice for vulnerable groups enhanced

2 The JP 6.1 was designed to run for thirty months, from July 2008 to December 2010. However, it was subsequently extended to end in June 2011 to coincide with the six- month extension of the UN Development Assistance Framework to Tanzania (UNDAF, 2007-2010). By the end of the programme, a total of US$7,997,383 had been spent out of an original budget of US$8,470,135. Of the total spent, US$4.7 million (58.5%) came from the One UN Fund and the additional US$3.3 million (41.5%) were parallel funds from participating UN agencies.

1.3 UN Delivering as One (DaO)

The UN in Tanzania is one of eight UN country offices that are piloting implementation of the “Delivering as One” concept. The adoption of the concept followed the recommendation in 2006 by the High-level Panel on UN System-wide Coherence in the Areas of Development, Humanitarian Assistance and the Environment appointed by the Secretary-General to review the way the UN delivered development assistance within countries in order to attain greater harmonisation and ensure more aid effectiveness. The High-level Panel stressed the need for the UN “…to overcome its fragmentation and deliver as one through a stronger commitment to working together on the implementation of one strategy, in the pursuit of one set of goals” (“Delivering as One”, Report of the Secretary-General’s High-Level Panel, 2006, p.2).

The UN agencies in the pilot countries are experimenting with ways to increase the UN system’s impact through more coherent programmes, reduced transaction costs for national governments, and lower overhead costs for the UN system. Countries implementing the DaO reforms are supposed to operate according to the following guiding principles defined by the High-Level Panel:  One Leader: an empowered Resident Coordinator with authority to negotiate the One Country Programme with the national government on behalf of the entire UN system;  One Programme: country-owned and signed off by the government, a programme that is responsive to the national development framework, strategy and vision, and to internationally agreed development goals;  One Budgetary Framework: completely transparent, showing clearly the overheads and transaction costs of the UN and all of its funds, programmes and specialized agencies in the country; and  One Office: including one integrated results-based management system, integrated support services, joint premises (where appropriate), common security infrastructure and clear lines of accountability.

A subsequent addition was that of the UN speaking with One Voice that is coherent, strong and demonstrates its added-value to the national development context.

The GoT volunteered and the country was officially accepted in January 2007 as one of the pilot cases for the UN “Delivering as One”. In October of the same year, UN agencies signed a Memorandum of Understanding establishing the One UN Fund in Tanzania. The One UN Fund is the vehicle through which donors can finance the DaO in Tanzania.

3 A Joint GoT/UN Steering Committee (JSC), co-chaired by the Permanent Secretary for the Ministry of Finance and the UN Resident Coordinator was established to provide strategic guidance and national oversight to the One UN Programme and the One UN Fund. The JSC has overall strategic responsibility for all eleven Joint Programmes that have been developed since the beginning of One UN in Tanzania under UNDAF (2007-2011).

Process indicators for “Delivering as One” are derived from, and are intended to assess, compliance with the Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness (2005) and the Accra Agenda for Action (2008). Thus, in reporting on the Joint Programmes for One UN Tanzania, the process indicators used to measure progress will usually include items such as:  % of JP support that is reported on the government’s budget;  % of the JP budget channelled through the Exchequer;  % of the JP funds using public procurement systems;  % of the JP budget channelled through the Managing Agent;  % of IPs using FACE to request quarterly fund disbursements.

UNDP was selected as the Managing Agent (MA) with responsibility for overall coordination of the Joint Programme 6.1. The role and responsibilities of the MA were defined in the Memorandum of Understanding signed by the heads of the participating UN agencies during the period November 2008 to January 2009. According to the MoU, the MA had “…full programmatic accountability for the results of the Joint Programme and financial accountability for the funds disbursed to it” (MoU for UN Joint Programme 6.1, Article 1). The duties and responsibilities of the MA included: (i) receiving funds for the JP 6.1, (ii) disbursing funds to IPs through the Treasury, (iii) coordinating technical inputs by the PUNs, (iv) following up with the PUNs and IPs on activity implementation, and (v) preparing narrative (activity/output) and financial reports, with inputs from the IPs and the PUNs.

UNDP, as the Managing Agent, was also responsible for providing a Programme Manager to coordinate all joint programme activities on its behalf. The Programme Manager would be based in Kigoma.

1.4 Purpose of the Evaluation

The purpose of the evaluation was to assess the achievements (outputs and outcomes) of the Joint Programme 6.1 in Northwestern Tanzania since its commencement. More specifically, the evaluation aimed to: (i) assess the appropriateness, relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability of the JP 6.1 outputs and achievements; and (ii) identify lessons learned and draw conclusions which could inform other interventions and which could contribute to decision making processes of the UN, Government of Tanzania (GoT) and other development partners.

The detailed TOR are presented at the end of this report as Appendix 1.

4 1.5 Structure of the Report

This report consists of five chapters. This first chapter provides background information on the Joint Programme 6.1 and defines the purpose of the evaluation. Chapter 2 describes the methodology that was used in the evaluation process, including information and data gathering and limitations of the study. Chapter 3 discusses the programme’s outputs. Chapter 4 assesses the programme’s outcomes and impacts on the target regions and communities, their sustainability, issues of partnerships and coordination, and cross-cutting issues that were addressed by the programme. The final chapter contains the conclusion, lessons learned and recommendations for consideration by both the GoT and the UN in Tanzania.

5 2.0 EVALUATION METHODOLOGY

2.1 Introduction

The evaluation of the JP 6.1 started on Monday 9 May 2011 with introductory meetings with the Programme Management Team in UNDP, Dar es Salaam. The purpose of the meetings was to enable the consultants to obtain a deeper understanding of the Terms of Reference and the JP 6.1, its design, aims and objectives, implementation, the participating UN agencies, and the implementing partners. During that first week, the consultants also held a joint meeting with representatives of the PUNs to brief them on the proposed evaluation work schedule.

2.2 Review of Documents

The consultants were provided with several background documents on the programme for review. These included the JP 6.1 11-month report for July 2008-May 2009, annual reports for 2009 and 2010 calendar years, reports on previous monitoring visits to the two regions, and annual work plans agreed with the GoT through the PMO-RALG.

The consultants were informed that no Project Document was agreed and signed with the GoT before the start of the programme. In the absence of a Project Document, implementation of JP 6.1 activities has been based on annual work plans and budgets agreed in planning meetings between the PUNs and the IPs and signed by the Managing Agent on behalf of the PUNs and by PMO-RALG on behalf of the GoT.

Other background documents relevant to the evaluation of the JP 6.1 were the report of the High-level Panel on UN System-wide Coherence, the Paris Declaration, and the Accra Agenda for Action. The recently published annual report for 2010 by the UN Resident Coordinator in Tanzania (Delivering as One in Tanzania) was also valuable, especially in respect of the DaO process indicators as applied to the Joint Programmes in Tanzania.

2.3 Evaluation Work Plan

The consultants prepared a work plan detailing how they proposed to conduct the evaluation (Appendix 2). The assignment was to be completed within 30 working days. In brief, data collection and information gathering involved interviews with a wide range of key informants within the PUNs and the IPs both in Dar es Salaam and in the five districts, as well as conducting focus group discussions with beneficiary communities.

The first six working days were spent in Dar es Salaam conducting interviews with key informants and reviewing programme documents. Thereafter, the consultants spent 18 working days conducting interviews and field visits in Kigoma and Kagera Regions. The final days were spent in Dar es Salaam conducting further interviews, analysing the information collected and compiling the evaluation report.

6 2.4 Development of Data Collection Tools

The consultants developed a number of data collection instruments. These were submitted as part of the Inception Report for approval by the UNDP, the commissioning agent for the evaluation study.

The data collection tools comprised of:

(i) An evaluation matrix: This was developed to provide a mechanism for seeking answers to the series of evaluation questions contained in the Terms of Reference, in the absence of a Project Document and an M&E Plan. The evaluation matrix comprises four columns (Appendix 3). The first column contains questions as given in the Terms of Reference dealing with issues pertaining to the programme: its outputs, relevance, efficiency, effectiveness, impacts, sustainability, partnerships and coordination, and cross-cutting issues addressed by the programme. The second column in the evaluation matrix contains what the consultants considered as possible performance indicators for these questions, while the third column contains likely data sources and methods for data collection for the evaluation. A fourth column would contain summaries and comments on the programme’s outputs, outcomes and impacts.

(ii) An interview guide for use with the PUNs: Information sought from key informants included the PUNs’ involvement with, and contribution to, the JP 6.1, implementing partners, description of activities implemented, activity sites and beneficiaries, degree of completion of activities by the time of the evaluation, successes recorded and challenges experienced, assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the IPs, views and experiences with the operational modalities (the cluster system, fund disbursement, activity and financial reporting, monitoring), views regarding performance between Dar es Salaam-based and Kigoma-based PUNs, assessment of the impacts and sustainability of the programme outputs, and lessons learned.

(iii) An interview guide for use with the IPs: Information sought from key informants in the IPs in both the central government ministries and the LGAs included a description of the activities implemented, the extent of their completion and utilisation, types and numbers of beneficiaries, joint planning with the communities and with the PUNs, impacts of the programme outputs on different categories of stakeholders, plans for completion of activities that were not yet completed or fully operational, sustainability of the outputs, successes and challenges experienced, assessment of the operational modalities (e.g. availability of staff, procurement and contracting arrangements, disbursement of funds, reporting and monitoring), and lessons learned.

(iv) A focus group discussion guide with representatives of beneficiary communities: Information sought from the participants of the focus group discussions included their assessment of the problems experienced by their communities both during the time of the refugees and after, involvement of the communities in the planning of the implemented activities, relevance of the

7 implemented activities and outputs to community needs and priorities, benefits gained by the communities from the implemented activities, impacts of the outputs on their lives, and sustainability of the outputs.

2.5 Interviews with Key Informants

Several categories of key informants were interviewed both in Dar es Salaam and in the two regions. Collecting data across different groups of informants and individuals was necessary in order to validate the findings through the triangulation of information. The respondents were interviewed alone or in groups, in the latter case usually comprising senior managers/heads of institutions together with their subordinate staff. Their names and official positions are given in Appendix 4.

The key informants comprised the following categories: (i) The Programme Management Team in Dar es Salaam as the Managing Agent; (ii) The JP 6.1 Programme Manager and other UNDP staff based in Kigoma, in their capacity both as the programme management in the field as well as being one of the PUNs; (iii) Staff of the PUNs, including focal persons based in Dar es Salaam and field staff in Kigoma; (iv) JP 6.1 focal persons in the participating MDAs, namely the Ministry of Community Development, Gender and Children, Ministry of Education and Vocational Training, Ministry of Home Affairs, and the PMO–RALG; (v) Regional Administrative Secretaries (RAS) and staff in both Kigoma and Kagera Regions; (vi) District Executive Directors (DEDs) in the five districts and their staff such as planning officers, economists, community development officers and education officers; (vii) Ward and village executive officers and other community leaders.

2.6 Field Visits to Activity Sites

The consultants also travelled to several sites in all five districts where JP 6.1 activities were implemented. They were accompanied on these site visits by the field staff of the PUNs as well as representatives of the IPs from the respective district councils. The sites that were visited are shown in the work plan (Appendix 2). The purpose of the field visits was to enable an evidence based assessment of the programme’s activities and outputs, to seek clarification from both PUNs and IPs where necessary, and to meet with some of the local community leaders and beneficiaries.

The two regions of Kigoma and Kagera are large, with a combined land area of 66,278 km2. The distance by road from Ilagala on the shores of Lake Tanganyika (the southernmost place visited) in Kigoma District to Bukoba Town on the shores of Lake Victoria is over 1,000 km. The activity sites were spread over a large area across five districts. It was not practicable to visit all the sites in the three weeks available for the fieldwork. Nonetheless, the consultants ensured that they visited as many and as diverse as possible of the activity sites, and encompassing all the three clusters. Those places visited included:

8 (i) all the five new secondary schools, (ii) all four new health facilities as well as a pre-existing district hospital that was also supported by the programme, (iii) three of the 20 pilot land use planning villages, (iv) two schools for children with special needs, (v) three VTCs, comprising one FDC, one district VTC and one post-primary VTC, (vi) at least three primary schools with various JP 6.1 activities (provision of desks, child protection programmes and in-service training for teachers), and (vii) one of the three proposed agro-processing sites.

At each site, discussions were held with local leaders and beneficiaries, in addition to district council officials and the field staff of the respective PUNs.

2.7 Focus Group Discussions with Community Leaders and Beneficiaries

During the field visits, the consultants conducted five focus group discussions at randomly selected activity sites, four with representatives of beneficiary communities and one with primary school teachers. Participants in the community focus group discussions included village and ward leaders (i.e. ward and village executive officers, councillors and committee members). The teachers were also beneficiaries of the programme in that they had attended training workshops on the new curriculum for primary schools introduced by the Ministry of Education and Vocational Training.

2.8 Limitations of the Evaluation

A major limitation of the evaluation was the absence of set targets against which progress and outputs could be measured. At inception in 2008, no project document was prepared articulating the programme’s planned targets, as well as providing a monitoring plan. The project document would have included any available baseline data on social and economic conditions in the programme districts. The absence of this information (baseline data and targets) makes the evaluation problematic because there is nothing against which the programme outputs and their impacts can be measured in a “before and after” context. It was therefore not possible to quantify the impact of the programme on the beneficiaries due to lack of an appropriate data collection framework.

The annual reports of the JP 6.1 were also inconsistent in terms of the quantitative information that they provided on outputs of the programme. The latest, 2010, annual report contains several examples of the inconsistencies when comparing planned outputs and their indicators on one hand against progress made during the year. Some of the indicators suggest that quantitative data should have been reported to show progress, yet this was not done. For instance, in respect of Output 1 for Cluster 2 (p.13 of the 2010 report), the following are some of the indicators that were supposed to measure progress: “Number of planned integrated supervision visits conducted by the district” “Number of health facilities with capacity to deliver quality MNCH services” “Baseline assessment for training, equipment/supplies and data for tracking progress to establish needs and gaps conducted”

9 But information was not provided to show progress achieved on those indicators, thereby making it difficult for an objective assessment of achievements based on quantitative data. Similarly, reporting on progress made under Output 3 for Cluster 2 (page 16), it is stated “100 percent of target schools and about 70 percent of target wards developed holistic school development plans and ward/district management plans…” But the numbers of schools and wards that were originally targeted are not given in either the annual report or in the annual work plans for both 2009 and 2010.

Another limitation on the evaluation arises from the diversity and geographical spread of the JP 6.1 activities across five large districts. It was not possible to visit all the activity sites and meet with all stakeholders (including beneficiary communities) in the limited time that was available for the field data collection. Thus, while this evaluation report is derived from only a partial assessment of the programme, the consultants were, however, confident that their findings and conclusions were based on information that was both objective and representative of reality. Triangulation during data collection, together with the de-briefing sessions held in both Kigoma and Dar es Salaam for the PUNs, the MA and other stakeholders, were used to ensure that information and data were cross-checked and validated wherever possible.

10 3.0 KEY OUTPUTS OF THE JOINT PROGRAMME 6.1

3.1 Introduction

This chapter provides a description of the key outputs of the JP 6.1. A review of the annual reports of the JP 6.1 and other documents shows that there was a delay of some six months from the planned commencement of the programme in July 2008. According to the MA’s first report for the period July 2008 to May 2009, the planning process for the JP 6.1 began in 2007 and should have been completed by the beginning of 2008. However, there were prolonged negotiations between the GoT, the regional authorities and the districts which delayed approval of the programme and commencement of activities.

Among the issues under consideration were: (i) The inclusion of only one district from Kagera Region in the initial proposal, which was intended to specifically support only the refugee-hosting districts of Kigoma, Kasulu, Kibondo and Ngara. After prolonged negotiations, Karagwe District in Kagera Region was included in the programme. (ii) The Ministry of Community Development, Gender and Children, Ministry of Education and Vocational Training and the Ministry of Home Affairs decided to become involved as IPs for some activities under their mandates, as a result of which the programme had to be re-adjusted. (iii) Because of the delays, it became necessary re-align the JP 6.1 work plan with the districts’ and regions’ budget plans. Consequently, a new planning phase only started in August 2008 involving the PMO-RALG together with the districts and the regions as well as the three central government ministries. The PMO-RALG approved the new work plan towards the end of October 2008 while the three central ministries endorsed their components of the programme between December 2008 and February 2009. The PUNs endorsed the JP 6.1 work plan and MoU between them and the UNDP as the MA between November 2008 and January 2009.

Following endorsement of the programme by all the parties, implementation started in early 2009.

3.2 Key Outputs of the Joint Programme 6.1

The objectives and anticipated key results of the programme have already been outlined in Table 1. By the beginning of 2011, a large proportion of the planned activities had been implemented. Some had been successfully completed and were already benefiting the intended beneficiary districts and communities; other activities were in varying stages of completion. Overall, Clusters 2 and 3 had more outputs than Cluster 1, as shown in the following paragraphs. Additional information and comments on the programme’s outputs, outcomes and challenges, by district and cluster, are given in Appendix 5.

3.2.1 Education One of the aims of the Joint Programme 6.1 was to enhance the quality of education in the target districts (Cluster 2, Key Results 3 and 5). Indeed, this is probably the most visible of the outputs of the Joint Programme 6.1 both in terms of the numbers

11 and sizes of the physical structures that were constructed or rehabilitated as well as in the diversity of interventions aimed at capacity development in the target LGAs.

In respect of the rehabilitation of the structures in the former refugee camps, five new secondary schools, including two high schools, have been established, two in Kigoma District, and one each in Kasule, Kibondo and Ngara Districts. Two of these new secondary schools are for girls only, including one high school, thereby expanding opportunities for the girl child to attain qualifications for entry into tertiary education. Three of the secondary schools were already operational at the time of the evaluation while the other two were expected to enrol students before the end of 2011. The three lower secondary schools (Forms 1-4) mostly enrol students from within their districts and region.

Lugufu Girls Secondary School in Kigoma District opened in April 2010 and, at the time of the evaluation, had an enrolment of 80 pupils in Forms 1 and 2, all of them boarders at the school. The two high schools enrol students for Forms 5 and 6 (a pass at Form 6 is the normal university entrance qualification) on a national basis. Their establishment had contributed towards the respective districts’ goal of having at least four high schools per district, in line with the national education policy goal. At the time of the evaluation, Mkugwa Girls High School in Kibondo District, which opened in April 2009, had an enrolment of 105 students in Forms 5 and 6. K91 Secondary School in Ngara District also opened in April 2009 and, at the time of the evaluation, it had an enrolment of 291 students in Forms 5 and 6. The school has a capacity for 480 students, including 398 boarders. The school authorities reported that they could not enrol more students at the present partly because of occasional water shortages. Another reason was that they still needed to construct a separation wall or fence between the rehabilitated male and female students’ dormitories before they could be occupied.

The remaining two schools, Lugufu Boys Secondary School in Kigoma District and Muyovosi High School in Kasulu District, were expected to enrol their first students for the 2011-2012 school year. Both schools will offer boarding facilities. Muyovosi is planned to be a co-educational high school offering Forms 5 and 6 while Lugufu Boys will offer lower secondary education from Form 1 to Form 4. At the time of the evaluation, reconstruction and rehabilitation of structures was almost complete at both schools.

A sixth, Kasangezi Girls Secondary School in Kasulu District, is a pre-existing community school located at a former refugee transit camp. It was supported by the JP 6.1 with the construction of new dormitories, a dining room and latrines. The new structures will enable it to turn into a proper boarding school for girls studying for Forms 1 to 4.

At all the six schools, both new and rehabilitated structures were constructed to the required government standards. The structures included classroom blocks, staff houses, libraries, toilets and (for boarding schools) kitchens and dormitories for the students. Desks for the classrooms and beds for the hostels had also been provided

1 While the school, which is at the site of the former NPA residential camp, is referred to as K9 in One UN and UNHCR reports, the Ngara District Council has named it Lukole High School.

12 with JP 6.1 support. Water supply systems had been rehabilitated to serve the students and staff and these had also been expanded to serve the local communities around the schools. Classrooms, dormitories and teachers’ houses were provided with solar power, thereby enabling both staff and students to study and prepare for lessons at night. The staff houses were finished to a higher standard than those usually available to teachers in schools belonging to either the government or district councils.

JP 6.1 support to the secondary school sector also included in-service training of teachers and the provision of teaching and learning materials aimed at improving the quality of education. The interventions included:  In-service training for 49 teachers in diagnostic teaching methods.  Training for 40 science teachers and the provision of micro-science kits to 27 co-educational and girls secondary schools in Kigoma, Kasulu and Kibondo Districts. It was anticipated that this would encourage more girls to opt for the sciences in future.  Training for 49 teachers on HIV/AIDS prevention, life skills, care and support.

Primary education in the five districts also received support, mainly in the form of capacity development for both teachers and local education officials, and the provision of teaching and learning materials. The support given to the primary school sector included:  300 desks to Karagwe District which were distributed to 10 schools, each school receiving 30 desks.  In-service training given to 252 primary school teachers in better teaching methods (diagnostic teaching methods). Other beneficiaries of the training in diagnostic teaching methods included 44 tutors from Kabanga and Kasulu Teacher Training Colleges, and 8 Teacher Resource Centre coordinators.  Distribution of 19,872 supplementary reading materials to schools in support of the training in diagnostic teaching methods. The reading materials were intended to promote a culture of reading, and to improve literacy levels among the learners.  Training of 252 primary school teachers and 8 Teacher Resource Centre coordinators on HIV/AIDS prevention, life skills, care and support for vulnerable groups, especially girls.  Training for over 300 teachers and head teachers from 38 schools in Kigoma, Kasulu and Kibondo Districts, as well as ward and district education officers, on the new child-centred education curriculum.  Training for 550 teachers in four districts on the teaching of Mathematics, Science and English.

The JP 6.1 also addressed the educational needs of children with various forms of disabilities including albinism, visual and hearing impairment, and physical disability. Examples of the support given by the programme included:  Training of 45 tutors from Kabanga and Kasulu Teacher Training Colleges on inclusive education. The tutors were expected cascade the new skills to their trainee teachers so that they would be better equipped to deal with children with special needs within an inclusive learning environment. The policy of the

13 GoT is for inclusiveness in the education of children with special needs, whereby they are fully integrated in the same schools as other children.  Training of 12 tutors from Kabanga and Kasulu Teacher Training Colleges on Braille and sign language.  Provision of learning and teaching materials such as Braille machines, hearing aids for the hard of hearing, sunglasses and skin lotions for persons with albinism, and lenses for those with limited vision to Kabanga Special Primary School in Kasulu District.  Construction and rehabilitation of dormitories, dining room and a perimeter security wall were still under way at Nengo Special Primary School in Kibondo District.

The JP 6.1 also provided support to vocational skills development in the five districts, including:  Training for 72 tutors from Folk Development Colleges (FDCs) and Vocational Training Centres (VTCs) in solar power installation and maintenance, preventive maintenance and sign language.  Training for 30 tutors and technicians from FDCs in new trades and skills, including the design and production of new products such as incubators for poultry production.  Installation of solar power to staff houses, computer laboratory, carpentry workshop and the sewing room at Kasulu FDC.  Provision of tools and equipment to the four post-primary VTCs in Karagwe District. The tools included sewing machines for dress-making classes, as well as planes, clamps and saws for carpentry classes. The Karagwe District VTC also received several items, including two PCs and one printer, a projector and screen, two over-locking machines and five butterfly sewing machines for its dressing-making classes.

3.2.2 Health The JP 6.1 had planned to achieve two key outputs for the health sector in the five districts, namely (i) to enhance the capacity of the LGAs to deliver quality primary health care services and (ii) to strengthen the LGAs’ management of major communicable diseases (i.e. TB, HIV/AIDS, malaria) (Cluster 2, Key Results 1, 2 and 5). The programme addressed the attainment of these two outputs in at least five ways: (a) through the rehabilitation and construction of new health facilities at the former refugee camps, (b) provision of medical equipment and supplies to both new and existing health facilities in the five districts, (c) in-service training of health personnel in order to build their capacity to delivery improved health services, (d) training of RHMTs and CHMTs in order to enhance their capacity for planning and management of improved health delivery systems, and (e) raising awareness and education among both village and ward leaders and the community in general about public health issues. As a result of these multi-pronged initiatives, it was reported that 70% of health facilities in the five districts were now providing PMTCT services.

The expansion and improvement of health facilities in the five target districts was addressed through a number of initiatives, including:  At least four health facilities have been constructed, comprising two dispensaries in Kibondo District and two health centres, one in Kasulu and the other in Ngara District. At the time of the evaluation, the Kasanda Dispensary

14 was already fully operational while only the OPD was providing services at the Kisongwe. Equipment and supplies procured include beds for in-patient wards, wheelchairs, and assortments of medical kits. At the Lukole Health Centre, only the OPD section was operational while the wards and other units were awaiting procurement and installation of various items of equipment and furniture. Muyovosi Health Centre in was still to open to the public.  The new health facilities were supplied with solar power, water and ablution facilities. Kitchens, dining and laundry facilities and incinerators were also provided at the health centres that will be admitting in-patients.  At Kibondo District Hospital, solar power had been installed in the wards and the water supply upgraded.  JP 6.1 also provided each district with one ambulance together with radio communication equipment to improve the referral system and provide an improved health service for the communities.  Equipment was provided for the MCH programme and distributed to health centres in Kibondo, Ngara and Karagwe. The equipment included delivery kits, caesarean section kits, infant resuscitation kits, delivery beds and mattresses, drip stands, catheters, stethoscopes, syringes, and child immunisation kits.  Standard treatment guidelines for malaria, TB, HIV/AIDS and community IMCI were procured and distributed to health facilities in the target districts.  Rural health centres were equipped to provide PMTCT.

Concurrent with the expansion of primary health care services was the training of health personnel as well as raising awareness about health issues within the communities. The programme supported health worker training and awareness creation in several ways, including:  Health workers trained on the provision of high impact interventions for child survival, including PMTCT and PITC (253 persons trained), infant and young child feeding (199 persons), emergency obstetrics and neonatal care (50), high impact nutrition interventions and management of severe malnutrition in health facilities (199 health workers and 222 community resource persons).  109 health workers trained on ante-natal health care in three districts of Kasulu, Kibondo and Ngara.  Training of health workers and CHMTs on the new guidelines for the treatment of malaria and HIV/AIDS.  Training provided for 206 health workers on EPI and implementation of the “Reaching Every Child” immunisation programme in the ten worst performing health facilities in each district. All the districts in NWT had been included in the 51 low immunisation performing districts in the country.  Regional and district council health management teams have been trained on how to effectively respond to maternal and child health needs during emergencies, the use of HMIS for planning, and on the documentation and use of best practices.  Awareness raising in communities by training village leaders on PMTCT, prevention of paediatric AIDS, EPI, identification and care of children with malnutrition and male involvement in reproductive health services.  Radio programmes have been presented to raise community awareness on the importance of immunisation.

15  Training on supervision by Regional Health Management Teams to CHMTs and to health facilities.  Meetings held with traditional birth attendants on the importance of delivery at health facilities and PMTCT.

In Karagwe District, nutritional support was provided for about 120 eligible TB/HIV/AIDS patients. The distributed items included rice, cooking oil, sugar, milk powder, maize meal, soya beans and groundnuts.

3.2.3 Land Use Planning The JP 6.1 sought to support the orderly re-population of the former refugee camps, ensuring reduction in conflicts over land and sustainable management of natural resources (Cluster 3, Key Result 3). It supported the LGAs with land use planning in pilot villages in or close to the former refugee camps in accordance with the Land Act No. 4 of 1999 and the Village Land Act No. 5 of 1999. This involved the demarcation of village boundaries, recording of their GPS coordinates, mapping of key points such as roads and paths, and the identification of major land uses such as residential, arable, grazing, markets/commercial, and social services like schools, cemeteries and health facilities.

At least 20 pilot villages were assisted with boundary demarcation and the preparation of land use maps, including 5 in Kasulu District, 7 in Kibondo, 5 in Ngara and 3 in Karagwe District. By the time of the evaluation, progress achieved varied between villages. Some had only completed the first stages of boundary demarcation. However, others had already had their village boundary outline plans and bye-laws approved by the district and regional authorities and registered with the Commissioner for Lands in the Ministry of Lands, Housing and Human Settlements Development.

The support given to the LGAs for land survey and land use planning was in line with government policy. The Ministry of Lands, Housing and Human Settlements Development developed a strategic plan during 2005/2006 to guide implementation of the land laws in the country. Among the priorities listed in the implementation of the land laws were the following: (i) curbing sources of conflict over village lands, (ii) increasing the number of surveyed villages and issuance of Certificates of Village Land (CVLs) to village councils who then become responsible for the management of their village land, and issuing of Certificates of Customary Right of Occupancy (CCROs) to individual villagers, (iii) producing participatory land use plans at all levels, (iv) establishing village land councils and land tribunals, and (v) providing public education on land laws.

Besides the actual work of mapping village boundaries, both LGA staff and village leaders were trained in several pertinent areas including  legislation governing village land (i.e. the Village Land Act) and legal requirements for village land ownership,  resolution of land disputes,  participatory land use planning, and  environmental legislation and EIAs.

16 Equipment for land survey and mapping was acquired for the districts and their staff trained on its use.

3.2.4 Capacity Development in the LGAs Staff of the LGAs, from the regional to ward and village levels, were trained in several areas in order to enhance governance, participatory development planning, gender mainstreaming, child protection, environmental management and legislative requirement for EIAs (Cluster 2, Key Results 1-5 and Cluster 3, Key Results 1 and 3).

In summary, key interventions for capacity development for the LGAs were as follows: (i) For regional and district officers other than in education and health: Training on legislation governing land, participatory land use planning, resolution of land disputes, environmental management legislation and requirements for EIAs, and monitoring and evaluation. Staff participating in the training ranged from village and ward leaders to district officers as well as staff of the regional governments. Among those trained were 62 officers from Kigoma Region and Kigoma District; and 146 local leaders from four wards in Karagwe District.

(ii) For education officials: Schools inspectors, district and ward education officers were trained in several areas which were intended to enhance their supervisory and professional skills as educators. Training provided included diagnostic teaching methods (attended by 9 inspectors and 5 district education officers), school inspection and supervision, HIV/AIDS prevention (9 inspectors and 5 district education officers), care and support for vulnerable groups, special needs education, the new child-centred primary school curriculum, gender mainstreaming, re-entry policy for pregnant female students, and child protection.

Some 556 officers, including district and ward education officers, head- teachers and school-parent committee members from Kigoma, Kasulu, Kibondo and Ngara Districts, were trained in school development planning. As a result, all the target schools in the four districts had subsequently formulated three-year school development plans. A few of the schools had already managed to secure funds from other stakeholders and donors to implement priority areas identified in their development plans, such as the construction of classrooms and latrines, procurement of desks, and support for MVCs.

Over 214 education managers, including head teachers, inspectors, ward and district education officers were trained on the revised inspection guidelines in order to enhance their skills for school and education standards monitoring.

(iii) For health personnel: Health workers and officials at all levels - regional, district and ward - were trained in a variety of areas and given new skills aimed at enhancing their capacity to deliver improved health services. The training included new protocols and guidelines on MCH, HIV/AIDS counselling, malaria, and TB.

17 3.2.5 Child Protection The Joint Programme 6.1 also supported activities to raise awareness about child rights and child abuse (Cluster 2, Key Result 6 and Cluster 3, Key Result 4). Orphans and children with disabilities are usually most at risk of abuse, whether by parents, guardians or employers of child labourers. Disability remains a social taboo and many such children are hidden by their parents and guardians, thereby denying them their rights, including access to education. Furthermore, NWT is among the regions of the country that has witnessed the ritual murder of persons and children with albinism and trafficking in body parts during the past few years.

Several initiatives were implemented with JP 6.1 support to provide security and support to MVCs and persons with albinism (both children and adults). The following are some of the initiatives that were implemented in order to enhance child protection:  Training of staff from the wards, districts and the regions on child protection issues.  Training of primary school teachers, parents and guardians on how to organise and run “TUSEME” (Speak Out) clubs. These are school based clubs that seek to empower children and provide them with a forum to discus issues and problems affecting them, including raising awareness on gender equity both in school and in the community. Over 87 clubs in 38 schools in four districts were established.  The JP 6.1 also supported a child protection radio programme aired on a local radio station, Radio Kwizera.  Establishment of village MVC committees and training of their members to monitor and report the presence of MVCs to social welfare officers as part of measures to strengthen child protection systems. A survey supported by the JP 6.1 identified some 2,650 MVCs in six wards within Kasulu District. MVC committees and child justice facilitators have now been established in every village in Kigoma, Kasulu, Kibondo and Ngara Districts.  Kabanga Special Primary School in Kasulu District is now providing secure shelter for infants with albinism and their mothers/guardians.  Poor and vulnerable secondary school children have been assisted with school fees and uniforms by some of the district councils.

3.2.6 Water, Sanitation and Hygiene (WASH) The JP 6.1 sought to enhance community capacity to manage water sources and to improve sanitation and hygiene conditions in the target districts (Cluster 2, Key Result 4). The former refugee camps were previously served with water supplies pumped from either natural springs or boreholes. A key component in the conversion of infrastructure in these camps was the rehabilitation of water supplies and the provision of sanitation facilities. Where water from natural sources is not available or is inadequate, facilities for rainwater harvesting have been erected. Today, water and sanitation coverage at the rehabilitated schools and health centres is almost 100%. The new water supplies have also been extended to include the surrounding communities through the construction of appropriately located water points.

Within the wider communities, local artisans in 30 villages in Kibondo and Ngara Districts were trained in the construction of latrines. Water usage groups in 25 villages in Kasulu and Ngara Districts were trained in the maintenance and repair of

18 water pumps. Hygiene training and awareness raising were undertaken among village leaders, district education and health officials. Kigoma and Kasulu District health officials were also involved in the preparation of posters for cholera prevention, and 20 cholera information billboards were placed at strategic sites along the shores of Lake Tanganyika.

School WASH mapping was conducted in three districts (Kigoma, Kasulu and Kibondo) to identify needs and gaps and, thereafter, support the districts in establishing strategies for addressing them. Hygiene promotion training was conducted in 34 primary schools in Kasulu, Kibondo and Ngara Districts involving children, teachers and community members. Water and sanitation were improved at seven schools in Kibondo District and 20 schools in Kigoma District through the provision of rainwater harvesting tanks, and the construction of latrines and hand- washing facilities. By the end of 2009, it was estimated that some 13,980 school children had access to safe water in the target schools.

3.2.7 Border and Migration Controls The JP 6.1 also provided support in order to enhance border and migration controls in the two regions. This was in line with programme goal of improving the management of migration and immigration procedures and infrastructure (Cluster 3, Key Result 2).

The support given included:  Provision of equipment such as passport and finger print readers, computers, radio communication systems, and motor bikes to border posts and the two regional immigration offices for Kigoma and Kagera.  Border control officers were trained in introductory computing skills to enable them to use the new equipment.  Refurbishment of buildings at border posts and installation of solar power for lighting and to run their computers.  3 police stations were also refurbished and provided with solar power.  Installation of an electronic data exchange system between border posts and the regional immigration offices and linked to Immigration Headquarters in Dar es Salaam.  Training for 160 junior and middle level officials (including village and ward executive officers, police and immigration officers) on migration management and the protection of asylum seekers.  Joint training for both migration authorities and the police on data collection at border posts, human trafficking, passport control procedures, and migration management. The immigration and police departments are also being encouraged to share equipment and to undertake joint border patrols, especially on the lakes. The training was designed as a TOT course so that the participants could cascade the new skills to other officers at their workplaces.  Familiarisation missions to border authorities in neighbouring countries of Burundi, DRC and Rwanda.  Awareness raising in the community on human trafficking was conducted through Radio Kwizera. The radio campaigns were also broadcast in DRC, Burundi and Rwanda using their local languages.

19 3.3 Where was the JP 6.1 Less Successful?

The JP 6.1 also aimed to develop and strengthen systems for local economic development (LED), food security, and to facilitate the organisation of community groups for adoption of small-scale agro-processing technologies (Cluster 1, Key Results 1-3). Unfortunately, this was the least successful of the three clusters under the programme.

Several of the activities that had been planned for implementation under Cluster 1, such as the LED activities, were subsequently cancelled for a variety of reasons. Contributing factors for the cancellation of the planned activities appeared to include the absence from Kigoma of three of the PUNs in this cluster and less than full commitment to the programme on their part.

The few activities that were started had not been completed by the time of the evaluation. For instance, the results of both the value chain analysis of priority commodities with potential for market creation and agro-processing and the food security and vulnerability analysis, were still to be translated into actionable interventions that can benefit the communities.

There were delays in the procurement of equipment and in the identification of both the sites and beneficiary groups for the proposed agro-processing activities. According to the JP 6.1 annual report for 2010, only three groups of agro-producers, one each in Kigoma, Kasulu and Kibondo Districts and mostly made up of youths and women, were identified and given equipment for agro-processing of cassava and palm oil. The aim was to use these three groups as pilot cases to assess the prospects for local SME development capacity, value addition in food processing and the development of regional market linkages. Unfortunately, up to the time of the evaluation, little progress had been made on these activities.

The oil palm expressing equipment and biogas plant at Ilagala in Kigoma District is a case in point on the lack of progress under Cluster 1. The equipment was delivered in July 2010 and some of it installed by technicians from SIDO in Kigoma. Other items of equipment were still to be installed up to the time of the evaluation, including the biogas plant. Meanwhile, members of farmers’ group were continuing to use their traditional, labour-intensive techniques for expressing the oil. It was only at the beginning of June 2011 - some 10 months after the equipment had been delivered - that technicians from UNIDO came to conduct an assessment for the installation of the remaining equipment and the biogas plant.

20 4.0 PROGRAMME RELEVANCE, EFFICIENCY, IMPACTS, SUSTAINABILITY AND PARTNERSHIPS

4.1 Introduction

This chapter assesses the outputs of the JP 6.1 against the evaluation criteria in the TOR. These criteria are: the relevance of the programme in relation to the attainment of national development goals, the efficiency and effectiveness of the programme, its impact on the lives of the refugee hosting communities, sustainability of the programme outputs, partnerships and coordination, and the extent to which cross- cutting issues were addressed.

4.2 Relevance of the JP 6.1

Relevance refers to how well a development programme addresses the key problems affecting the intended beneficiary community, whether the implemented activities and adopted strategies are aligned to the priorities of the communities, and the extent to which the outputs contribute to national policies and the attainment of international development goals including the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). This evaluation sought to assess the relevance of the Joint Programme 6.1 in relation to the needs and priorities of the communities of NWT and the country in general, as articulated in the government’s national development strategy for poverty eradication on Mainland Tanzania (MKUKUTA).

The JP 6.1 was designed so that implemented activities addressed the three clusters under the national poverty eradication framework (see Table 1). A participatory planning process at the sub-national level served to enhance the relevance of the programme. Activities for implementation were discussed and agreed with the respective IPs (i.e. district councils, regional governments and MDAs) in joint planning meetings. The product of these meetings, an annual work plan, was endorsed and signed by the Permanent Secretary in the PMO-RALG on behalf of the GoT and by the Country Director for UNDP (the Managing Agent) on behalf of the UN.

While the activities in the annual work plans emanated from the district councils’ and regional governments’ development plans, there was concern amongst some informants in the regions that the funded activities did not always reflect the priorities of the districts. This was because some of the districts’ immediate priorities lay outside what the programme could support. It was for this reason, for instance, that some officers in the LGAs felt that the JP 6.1 should have included a component on rehabilitation of the road infrastructure to make up for the damage done by the heavy trucks brought into their areas by UN agencies.

Assessment of programme relevance also begs the question: relevant for whom? The JP 6.1 sought to give back to the refugee hosting communities. Most of the activities supported by the programme are directly relevant to the communities, notably improved water supplies, schools, health facilities, and capacity development through the various training initiatives. However, JP 6.1 support for high schools raises questions concerning the identification of beneficiaries.

21 The support given for the development of Mkugwa Girls and K9 High Schools was at the request of the respective district authorities. This would enable the two districts (Kibondo and Ngara respectively) move a step closer to meeting the government target of having at least four high schools per district. However, it is also government policy that enrolment into Form 5 is done on a national basis. Students are enrolled on the basis of their performance in national examinations at the end of Form 4 and can come from any part of the country. At the time of the evaluation, only two out of the 105 girls at Mkugwa Girls High School were from within Kibondo District. At K9 High School, only 26 out of the 291 students were from within Ngara District (Box 1).

Box 1: Who is the beneficiary? - Mkugwa Girls High School, Kibondo District

Cluster II of the Joint Programme 6.1 seeks to improve access to social services in the target districts from the rehabilitation of assets in the former refugee camps. Mkugwa Girls High School was established at the site of a former primary school for refugee children. The Kibondo District Council decided on a boarding school for girls studying for Forms 5 and 6, with a medium term objective that the school will focus on science teaching.

UN One and UNCHR parallel funds provided for the construction of several buildings including three science laboratories (for biology, chemistry and physics), laboratory equipment, two libraries (for arts and sciences), students’ dormitories, a perimeter wall. Staff houses were also rehabilitated. Solar power has been installed in the school.

The school has an enrolment of 105 students. Its first group of students recently wrote their Form 6 national examinations and produced the best results out of the nine high schools in Kigoma Region.

However, at present the school is unable to offer any science subjects because it does not have a single science teacher on its staff. It currently has only 8 teachers, whereas it is supposed to have 20.

The case of Mkugwa Girls High School poses questions on who constitutes the beneficiaries that JP 6.1 seeks to reward for hosting refugees. For the district, the establishment of the school went a long way towards its goal of having at least four high schools, in line with government policy. On the other hand, enrolment into high schools is conducted on a national basis, according to the students’ Form 4 results. Applicants come from all parts of the country. Examination results in the district’s secondary schools are not as good as those from other regions. As a result, only two out of the 105 girls at the school come from within the district.

The establishment of Mkugwa Girls High School means the Kibondo District is one school closer to meeting the national minimum target number of high schools per district. However, the benefits and relevance to the local population are likely to remain minimal until such time that the district’s own Form 4 examination results have improved.

Likewise, the national shortage of qualified science teachers means that the laboratories and equipment provided under JP 6.1 may remain unutilised for some time.

Similarly, K9 High School in Ngara District has a current enrolment of 291 students in Forms 5 and 6, of whom only 26 are from within the district.

Thus, the establishment of the two schools with JP 6.1 support has gone some way in creating more educational opportunities for the country’s young people in keeping with government policy and for the two districts to attain their target in terms of the number of high schools per district. However, the communities that were hosting refugees cannot claim to be benefiting directly from these two educational establishments.

22 A contrasting example is provided by the case of Lugufu Girls Secondary School in Kigoma District (Box 2). The establishment of the school has created more opportunities for girls, most of them from within the district. All the 80 students are boarders at the school. With the benefit of solar lighting in their dormitories, the students are able to study in the evenings, unlike many of their counterparts in other schools who do not have electricity either at home or in their schools. For these communities, a secondary school offering classes from Form 1 to Form 4 has been more relevant for them and their children.

Box 2: Programme relevance - Lugufu Girls Secondary School, Kigoma District

The African girl child faces many obstacles that hinder her from pursuing an education that can ensure a better life for her.

The Kigoma District Council decided to convert one of the former refugee camp sites at Lugufu into a secondary school for girls. One UN funds and UNHCR parallel funds were used to construct new classroom blocks, hostels, a library, two teachers’ houses (for four teachers), and a perimeter wall. Solar lighting has been installed in the dormitories and tanks purchased for water harvesting. Because of the remoteness of the site, a motor vehicle was purchased for the school.

The school opened in February 2010 with 35 students enrolled in Form 1. It now has 80 students in Forms 1 and 2. All the students are boarders living in the hostels. Most of the students are drawn from within the district, including some from neighbouring villages.

With solar lighting in their hostels, the girls can study in the evenings, something their day scholar counterparts in neighbouring villages are unable to do because they have no electricity at home.

The standard of houses built for the teachers is considerably better than that commonly available to teachers in other council and government schools. The houses have been provided with solar power. This attractive accommodation should enable the school to attract more and better qualified teachers in future.

Construction of the school was done mostly by local contractors from within Kigoma District, thereby creating employment and income opportunities for the inhabitants.

4.3 Programme Efficiency and Effectiveness

Analysis of programme efficiency and effectiveness entails assessing costs in relation to the intended objectives, including the extent to which the programme used the most cost-efficient resources to achieve its outputs and outcomes. Key issues to be addressed include whether resources were used appropriately and planned activities were completed in a timely manner, and whether the implemented activities exhibit good quality and value for money.

First, a feature of the JP 6.1 was that the IPs were government institutions at national, regional and district levels. The existence of district and regional administrative structures and personnel which were available to deliver results meant that the programme did not need to establish new or parallel structures to implement the planned activities.

23 Second, recurrent costs of using these government structures and staff were borne by the GoT through the normal budget allocations for staff salaries, transport2 and fuel, per diems, consumables and other expenses. Private sector firms and not-for- profit organisations were involved only as contracted providers of goods and services. This means that funds allocated to the JP 6.1 went towards actual implementation of activities. This is in contrast to other funding arrangements under which a varying, but often substantial, proportion of the budget goes towards recurrent costs. For example, the development budgets of the five district councils in NWT accounted for between one-third and three-quarters of their annual total budgets for the past three years (FY 2008/09 to FY 2010/11). Therefore, the JP 6.1 was money well spent as almost all of it went into development rather than recurrent costs.

Third, the IPs used the normal government procurement systems where goods and services were required, especially for the construction and rehabilitation of structures. Information provided during the evaluation indicated that, in most instances, contracts were awarded to local contractors within the regions rather than to contractors from outside NWT. Mobilisation and other costs would be substantially higher for contractors from outside the region than for local contractors. The works were monitored for quality and standards by technicians from the respective district councils and by staff of the relevant PUNs. There were only a few instances where a contractor had to be dismissed for poor workmanship or non-performance. Likewise, most other service providers such as training facilitators and land surveyors were contracted from within the regions. Overall, the use of local contractors will have served to reduce procurement costs for goods and services.

A fourth factor that enhanced programme efficiency in the use of resources was joint planning and monitoring of fund use through quarterly FACE reports. Since early 2010, Kigoma-based PUNs have held regular, usually monthly, meetings to review progress in activity implementation. Information sharing and activity reporting provided a mechanism for monitoring progress on implementation, resulting in the re-allocation of funds that was done towards the end of 2010. Otherwise those funds would have remained unutilised until it was too late for them to be re-allocated to other IPs that were able to use them.

However, there were also several factors that probably worked to undermine programme efficiency and effectiveness. The first was the delay in the start of the programme, as explained at the beginning of the previous chapter. Until the beginning of 2009, even the UN agencies in the field were uncertain about the programme and what was expected of them.

A second factor militating against programme efficiency was the slow disbursement of funds through the Exchequer system as this resulted in delays in the implementation of planned activities. In brief, the process was such that an IP was informed by letter from the MA when the requested funds were transferred to the Treasury. Most interviewees in the IPs said that it could take two or more months before the money was credited to their bank accounts. The IPs also complained that

2 However, at the start of the programme, UNHCR procured four new vehicles for the use by the districts to facilitate implementation and monitoring.

24 efforts to follow up with the Treasury did not always bring immediate results. However, some IPs seemed to have eventually identified particular individuals within the Treasury who could serve as contact persons, and this had helped them with follow-up and feedback on the status of the funds. Thus, the ingenuity and persistence of staff within the IPs was an important factor in facilitating fund disbursement through the Exchequer system.

However, it was also noted by several respondents that the pace of fund disbursement had improved during the past year. One IP reported that in 2009, it had received funds in August after waiting for six months from March of that year. In 2010, the disbursement was quicker. The money had been credited into its account within two months of submitting the request.

It is also important to note that some IPs were able to pre-finance their planned activities using other funds available to them, using the letter from the MA as a guarantee that money would be reimbursed. But this was not practical in all cases and required authorisation from the relevant bodies such as the District Council’s Finance Committee.

Thirdly, some of the staffing arrangements in the IPs, together with the less than enthusiastic commitment of some PUNs, worked against programme efficiency and timely implementation of activities. In some IPs, staff turnover and re-deployment to other duties negatively affected continuity in programme activities. On the other hand, the commitment of some PUNs and their deployment of staff to the JP 6.1 were less than total. The contrasting experiences with the activities respectively supported by UNESCO and UNIDO are cases in point (see Box 3). That experience suggested that, with commitment, even those PUNs that did not have a presence in NWT could still deliver and ensure that their counterpart IPs were given the necessary technical support.

Box 3: Programme efficiency – “Delivering as One” requires commitment, inter-agency communication and coordination

If Delivering as One is going to succeed and become the modus operandi of the future, PUNs will need to commit to working together, and improve inter-agency communication and information sharing. Two examples illustrate the importance of commitment, communication, information sharing and coordination between agencies.

UNESCO has no presence in Kigoma, operating from Dar es Salaam instead. In 2010, the JP 6.1 focal person in UNESCO retired. We were informed that, before retirement, the focal person informed the Programme Management Team about her pending retirement. UNESCO appointed a new focal person and also informed the Programme Management Team. We were further informed that when the UN team in Kigoma was going on supervision visits to the IPs, UNESCO would communicate whatever it wanted monitored and reported on at its project sites.

In contrast, UNIDO had a presence in NWT, with an office in One UN House, Kigoma, until the end of 2010 when its representative left. Apparently, it has been difficult to establish regular communication between the Programme Management Team and UNIDO since then. This has also contributed to the delay in installing the remainder of the equipment for the palm oil extraction plant at Ilagala, Kigoma District. The equipment was delivered in July 2010, but was still idle up the time of the evaluation in May-June 2011. The plant is for the 25-member Yatakamoyo Farmers Group which has 13 females and 12 males. Key components that remained to be installed included a biogas plant and solar power system for the village as a whole.

At the time of the evaluation (June 2011), UNIDO had finally made arrangements for technicians to install the remaining equipment and get the plant operational.

25 4.4 Programme Outcomes/Impacts

In assessing the impact of a programme, one is considering the change brought about on the lives of the people. Specific issues to be examined include whether programme outputs have made a difference to the lives of the communities, and whether there have been marked changes in the welfare of the intended beneficiaries and communities, which can be attributed to the interventions carried out. Unfortunately, there was no situation analysis conducted prior to the start of the programme and, as mentioned earlier, there was no Project Document either which would have provided baseline information on social and economic conditions in the target districts. Consequently, the impacts of the JP 6.1 can only be inferred from the outputs, measured against the anticipated key results of the programme.

Furthermore, reference has already been made to the lack of progress in the implementation of planned activities under Cluster 1. Therefore, the following paragraphs focus on the impacts of the outputs under Clusters 2 and 3 only.

4.4.1 Programme Impacts on the Quality of Health Services

Cluster 2, Key Result 1: Capacity of LGAs to deliver quality primary health care services enhanced Cluster 2, Key Result 2: Comprehensive management of major communicable diseases (TB, HIV/AIDS, malaria and others) strengthened in target districts Cluster 2, Key Result 5: Improved and converted assets in the former refugee camps for delivery of social services undertaken

The JP 6.1 outputs in the health sector were in at least five respects: (i) establishment of new health facilities at the sites of the former refugee camps, (ii) provision of equipment and other medical supplies, (iii) in-service training for health workers, (iv) capacity development for health management officials, and (v) raising awareness about health issues within the communities. Some of the interventions were already impacting on the quality of health services in the target districts and on the lives of the inhabitants.

The major impacts on the quality of health services in the target districts may be summed as follows:  Improved accessibility: the construction of four new health facilities in former refugee camps has increased the number of facilities available to the communities, and, as a result, improved their access to services. For instance, the new Kisongwe Dispensary serves four villages with an estimated population of about 20,000. Prior to its opening, the nearest health facility for these villagers was 10 km away.  Better trained health personnel: The in-service training given to health workers has enhanced their skills to deliver improved quality of health care covering areas such as MCH, management of communicable diseases, EPI.  Better equipped health facilities: The procurement and installation of new equipment and medical supplies was not confined to the four new health facilities constructed with JP 6.1 support alone. Other health facilities in the target districts were also equipped and provided with essential medical

26 supplies. For instance, according to the 2010 JP 6.1 annual report, 70% of the health facilities in the five districts were now providing PMTCT services.  Standardisation of treatment: The procurement and distribution of standard treatment guidelines and training given to health workers on these guidelines ensure greater equality of treatment and care at all target health facilities in the districts.  Improved referral system: The procurement and distribution of an ambulance and radio communication equipment to each district has contributed to the improvement of the patient referral system.  Improved management of the health delivery system: Management of the health services in the five districts has been enhanced by the supervisory skills training given to health officials from ward to district and regional levels. This includes enhanced competencies in health service planning, use of HMIS by RHMTs and CHMTs, documentation and use of best practices.  Improved community involvement in preventive health monitoring: The training given to village and ward leaders and the raising of public awareness will have contributed to improved health monitoring within the communities, early reporting of disease outbreaks and other emerging health problems.

The overall impact emanating from improved quality of health services will be manifest in reduced infant mortality, reduced maternal deaths, reduced incidence of water-borne diseases, more effective management of emergencies and disease outbreaks, as well as improved treatment, care and support for people with HIV/AIDS and TB.

4.4.2 Programme Impacts on the Quality of Education

Cluster 2, Key Result 3: Quality education in target districts improved Cluster 2, Key Result 5: Improved and converted assets in the former refugee camps for delivery of social services undertaken

The outputs of the JP 6.1 will contribute to improvements of the quality of education in the five districts in several ways. Some of the impacts of the programme on the quality of education are already showing while others will become more evident over time.

Impacts from the JP 6.1 on the quality of education include:  Expansion of educational opportunities, especially for girls: Five new secondary schools have been constructed in the former refugee camps, thus creating additional educational opportunities for young people in the target districts and the country in general. Three of the schools were already operational at the time of the evaluation. The three (Lugufu Girls, Mkugwa and K9) had a combined enrolment of 476 pupils, of whom 83% were in Forms 5 or 6. Well over half of the 476 students at the three schools were girls, 80 of them at Lugufu Girls Secondary School and 105 at Mkugwa Girls High School (excluding K9 High School). A sixth, Kasangezi Girls Secondary, had its facilities enhanced to enable it to convert from a day to a boarding school for girls.

27  Better trained teachers: In-service training provided for all categories of teachers – primary, secondary, teachers of children with special needs, as well as tutors in TTCs – has enhanced their competence as educators. The training was not restricted to teachers in the new JP 6.1 funded schools alone, but was provided to many more teachers from schools in the five target districts.  Improved management and supervision of education services: In-service training given to education officials, from head teachers, ward and district education officers and regional officials, has enhanced the participants’ competencies as education managers and supervisors, schools inspectors and planners. Many of the schools in the districts have already prepared three-year development plans and several have started implementing some of the priority areas identified in those plans.  Improved availability of teaching and learning materials: The procurement of teaching and learning materials will have improved the learning environment for pupils. This included the provision of desks for the classrooms, supplementary reading materials for primary schools, tools and equipment for VTCs and FDCs, as well as learning and teaching resources for children with special needs.  Enhanced security for MVCs in the school and in the community: Awareness raising among educators, learners and community leaders about issues such as gender, child abuse and children with special needs will have contributed to creating an improved, more secure and more child-friendly environment for them, both at school and in the community.  New schools already showing signs of improved examination performance: The new schools are already showing evidence of outperforming older and more established schools. For instance, the first cohort of Form 6 students at Mkugwa wrote the ACSEE in February 2011. The school had the best pass rate out of the nine high schools in Kigoma Region. In the same ACSEE national examinations in February 2011, K9 High School in Ngara District was ranked 170 out of 440 schools in the country. Factors contributing towards better performance in public examinations by students from these schools may include the provision of solar power which enables both students and teachers to study and work longer at night, and the provision of boarding facilities that release students, especially female students, from the pressures of doing domestic chores if they were at home.

4.4.3 Programme Impacts on WASH

Cluster 2, Key Result 4: Community capacity to manage water sources and improve household water management enhanced

The impacts of the interventions in water and sanitation will be felt both within the vicinity of the rehabilitated former refugee camps, as well as in the wider communities where training and awareness raising were supported by the JP 6.1.

Some of the expected impacts include:  Reduced incidence of water-borne diseases: The installation of safe water supplies and the construction of latrines at both the rehabilitated former

28 refugee camps and other target schools mean that pupils and their teachers, health workers and patients now have access to safe water and improved sanitation. The resultant reduction in water-borne diseases such as diarrhoea and cholera means improved school attendances by pupils and their staff.  Improved access to safe water for neighbouring communities: Communities living close to the schools and health facilities where new water supplies have been installed now have access to safe and reliable water supplies close to their homes than before. A major constraint in the provision of water in rural areas is the issue of long walking distances. For instance, in Ngara District, it is estimated that only about 30% of the population is within 400 metres of a safe water point. Traditionally, women and girls are the ones responsible for water collection and the improved access has reduced their time spent on fetching water for their households.  Improved health conditions in the communities: WASH training and awareness raising will contribute to improved health conditions in the beneficiary communities.  Maintenance of water pumps: The training given to members of village water usage groups will help to reduce abuse of water pumps, ensure regular maintenance and prompt repairs when needed.  Expansion of latrine construction activities within the communities: The training of local artisans in the construction of latrines will ensure continuation of this activity beyond the life of the JP 6.1. The artisans can use their newly acquired skills as a source of income by building latrines for other members of their communities. The long-term effect will be a progressive improvement in sanitation conditions in the communities.

4.4.4 Protection of Vulnerable Groups

Cluster 2, Key Result 6: Access to care, support, protection and HIV prevention services for vulnerable groups including MVCs enhanced Cluster 3: Key Result 4: Access to justice for vulnerable groups enhanced

Several activities supported by the JP 6.1 aimed at strengthening the capacity of the regions to provide protection for vulnerable groups such as persons affected by HIV/AIDS, MVCs, and school children with special needs.

The following are some of the expected impacts of these initiatives:  Improved learning environment for children with special needs: The in- service training of teachers for children with special needs, and the provision of teaching and learning materials to schools enrolling children with special needs, will help to create improved and secure learning environments for them.  Empowered MVCs and other vulnerable groups: Vulnerable groups, the young, and in particular girls, have been capacitated with life skills and will be able to access the appropriate justice delivery systems in order to seek redress in the event of abuse.  Administrative structures that are supportive of vulnerable groups: Training and awareness raising given to LGA officials from the villages and wards to district council and regional levels will have created greater

29 awareness of the rights and needs of vulnerable groups, be it at school, in the provision of health services and in the community. This is evidenced by the fact that some districts are already providing nutritional support for persons with HIV/AIDS and providing school fees for eligible secondary school children, as well as the establishment of village MVC committees.  Reduced community discrimination and stigma against vulnerable groups: As community awareness rises through education and training, there will be a reduction in discrimination and stigma against disability, albinism, and HIV/AIDS and in the incidence of child abuse. In turn, an improvement in care and support for vulnerable groups will be expected to follow.

4.4.5 Programme Impacts on LGA Capacity for Planning, M&E and Gender Mainstreaming

Cluster 3, Key Result 1: Planning and M&E capacity at regional and district level strengthened with particular emphasis on gender sensitive budgeting and implementation Cluster 3, Key Result 3: Sustainable management of natural resources and conflicts enhanced in target areas

Officers of the LGAs received training that was aimed at enhancing their capacity for participatory land use planning, resolution of land disputes, understanding of environmental legislation and EIAs, and gender mainstreaming. It is expected that the impact of their newly acquired knowledge and skills will be demonstrated in several ways including:  Reduction in land disputes: Land use planning and the establishment of effective conflict resolution mechanisms should lead to a reduction in land disputes.  Access to credit for villagers: The development of land use plans and their registration with the Commissioner for Lands will enable villagers to apply for loans from financial lending institutions using their CCROs as collateral. The CCROs give legal recognition of their title to land.  Enhanced environmental management and protection: The LGAs will be expected to develop and implement environmental management plans for their areas, and ensure compliance with the legal requirements for EIAs on all applicable developments and effectively monitor all development activities.  Gender mainstreamed in development plans and budgets: Increased capacity of LGAs will be reflected in development plans and budgets in which gender is mainstreamed. Regional officials will demonstrate increased capacity to review district plans and budgets and ensure that gender considerations have been appropriately mainstreamed.

The potential cumulative impact of an LGA that is empowered and has the capacity to plan in a participatory manner that involves the community, and effectively manages the development process is indicated in the emerging land use planning activities that were supported by the JP 6.1. The proposed transformation of some villages into townships and small towns will bring about major changes in local economic activities, as well as in the social well-being of the inhabitants (see Box 4).

30 Box 4: Programme impact - land use planning in Nyakaiga Village, Karagwe District

Nyakaiga Village in Kibondo Ward, Karagwe District is being transformed into a small town, thanks in part to the Joint Programme 6.1. The village has a population of 4,450 inhabitants.

The village has been growing rapidly because it is the centre of a rich agricultural hinterland. In response to this rapid growth, the Karagwe District Council decided to convert the village into an urban centre with a proper town plan in accordance with the law. At the beginning, there was resistance from the villagers who were concerned that they would lose their customary rights to agricultural and residential land. Consultations followed between the inhabitants, the village leaders and the District Council. The inhabitants eventually agreed after being assured that all those who lost their land would be compensated in accordance with the provisions of the law, notably the Land Act No.4 of 1999.

Subsequently, the District Council received support from One UN Fund for the purpose of surveying the village boundaries and for training the village land committee and other village leaders in participatory land use planning. The village land committee also participated in the demarcation of their village boundaries and identification of land uses (e.g. residential areas, commercial land, market area, cemetery, schools and other services).

The town planning layout has been approved by all the relevant authorities and gazetted by the government. The District Council now intends to prepare a detailed land use map of the fledgling township, demarcating land for various uses. It is expected that the work will be completed by the end of July 2011. Thereafter, all new developments in the area will require town planning permission.

4.4.6 Programme Impacts on Migration Procedures and Controls

Cluster 3, Key Result 2: Management of migration and immigration procedures and infrastructure improved

The support provided by the JP 6.1 is expected to result in enhanced capacity for both Immigration and Police Departments to manage the border areas and ports of entry. Among the anticipated impacts will include:  Reduction in illegal migrations: Improved border controls, joint patrols with the police, as well as closer cooperation with migration authorities of neighbouring countries are expected to result in a reduction in illegal migrations into border regions.  Improved security for communities in border regions: The reduction in illegal cross-border movements will in turn lead to greater security in border regions, reduced illegal movement of firearms, and a reduction in criminal activities that remain unresolved because the culprits have taken refuge in neighbouring countries.  More accurate documentation of legal migrants: Border control authorities will be able to document and maintain more accurate records of migrants through the use of passport and finger print reading equipment. They will also be able to share the information between the ports of entry and their regional and national offices as well as with migration authorities in other countries.  Rights of asylum seekers observed: Immigration and police officers in border regions will be more knowledgeable about, and be able to observe the rights of asylum seekers in their management of migration flows.

31 4.5 Sustainability of Programme Outputs and Outcomes

Considerations of the sustainability of programme outputs entail assessment of the extent to which the objectives and outcomes will continue to be met after the programme itself has come to an end. Specific issues to be examined include the likelihood of positive effects continuing into the post-programme period and under what conditions (e.g. in the event that donor support or funding is withdrawn, will the local authority and/or community be able to sustain the outputs and under what conditions?). The sustainability of the JP 6.1 outputs will also depend on the type of exit strategy adopted by PUNs and the extent to which NWT continues to be considered a priority area under the recently launched UNDAP for Tanzania (2011- 2015). It is encouraging to note that UNDAP remains committed to supporting the remaining refugees in NWT and to strengthen environmental protection in refugee- populated areas.

During interviews, the IPs were at pains to stress that they had already, or were going to incorporate the JP 6.1 outputs within their MTEFs. This includes both recurrent costs of operating and maintaining those activities such as the new schools, health facilities, and water supply systems. However, their ability is predicated on factors beyond their control, and in particular on the extent to which the Treasury will be willing and able to allocate the required funds.

There are two aspects to the problem – development costs and recurrent or maintenance costs. Firstly, at the time of the evaluation, several of the outputs supported by the JP 6.1 were still either non-operational or only partially open for use. The expectation was that the LGAs will be able to secure the necessary funds to bring them into full operation. Examples include the completion of building works (e.g. incinerator at Muyovosi Dispensary), procurement of equipment and associated supplies for the health facilities and schools, and the finalisation of the village land use plans. Some of the libraries at the new schools remained without books and shelving. The high schools at which laboratories have been built and science kits procured were unable to offer science subjects to their students because of a national shortage of science teachers. It was clear that if the LGAs failed to secure funds from either the Treasury or other development partners, these outputs risked remaining unutilised for some time.

The second question is whether the LGAs will be able to secure adequate funds to meet the recurrent and maintenance costs of running these outputs, including those that have been completed under the JP 6.1 and are currently operational. The solar power system at Kibondo District Hospital is a case in point. At the time of the evaluation, the system was not working properly. It was providing a small amount of power that was sufficient for lighting the wards for only half the night. There seemed to be disagreement between the hospital administrators and the district council regarding who was responsible for investigating the problem and carrying out the necessary repairs.

The sustainability of some of the JP 6.1 outcomes will also depend on the extent to which the GoT is able to invest in related interventions aimed at improving the quality of social services in the target districts. For instance, the JP 6.1 supported the training of teachers on the new child-centred primary school curriculum which

32 focuses on participatory teaching and learning. The teachers that were met during the field visits welcomed the changes in principle. However, they also pointed out that the implementation of the new curriculum was problematic unless the existing conditions and constraints within the country’s education sector were adequately addressed as well by the Government of Tanzania. These constraints included overcrowded classes, shortages of textbooks and other learning materials, insufficient desks and poor physical structures (see Box 5).

Box 5: Sustainability of programme outputs - challenges of implementing the new primary school curriculum

The revised primary school curriculum stresses the importance of pupil-centred learning and teaching and encourages pupil participation in the classroom. JP 6.1 has supported the education authorities to cascade competences on the requirements of the new curriculum by funding refresher workshops for teachers.

However, the effectiveness of the JP 6.1 initiative in preparing the teachers for the new curriculum may be compromised by deficiencies in other aspects of the classroom situation in the schools. Teachers interviewed complained that implementation of the new curriculum was difficult under the current conditions which included large classes, shortages of textbooks, furniture (desks), and other teaching/learning materials.

The visit to Kigando Primary School in Karagwe District confirmed these deficiencies. The school is one of those that recently received a consignment of new desks acquired by the district with funding from the JP 6.1. The district’s 211 primary schools have a shortfall of 21,813 desks. Funds provided under the JP 6.1 were used to purchase 300 desks which were distributed to 10 schools, 30 per school, including Kigando Primary School which has an enrolment of 476 pupils. The school now has 155 desks, but still has a shortfall of 83. As a result of the shortage, some pupils at the school sit on the floor during lessons. In classrooms with desks, they sit three, instead of two, per desk. Class sizes are large, with one class observed during the visit having 65 pupils. Textbooks are in short supply, an average of three books per subject per class.

These conditions, according to the teachers, deterred implementation of child-centred teaching and learning approaches.

The number, qualifications and experience of staff in the LGAs will also influence the sustainability of the JP 6.1 outputs and achievements. Generally, most LGAs in the country lack qualified and competent staff in some key sectors, but the problem is worse in NWT, a remote region with poor infrastructure and services. This makes it difficult to attract qualified staff to work in the two regions. The Government of Tanzania recognises these inadequacies in the staff in the LGAs and has been implementing the Local Government Reform Programme which includes a capacity development component to train and develop the skills of regional and district administration staff. The shortage of staff is apparent even at JP 6.1 outputs already – science laboratories at both Mkugwa Girls High School in Kibondo District and K9 High School in Ngara District are not being used because of a shortage of science teachers.

Even where LGA staff have been trained, whether through the JP 6.1 or other training programmes, their newly acquired skills are often not fully utilised because of transfers to other departments or re-deployment to other duties. Thus, they are not given enough time to internalise and apply those skills which they will have acquired. A revolving door approach to staff training and deployment does not augur well for sustainability of programme outputs and outcomes. There is a need for the GoT to re-think the overall training and capacity development strategy for the LGAs.

33 4.6 Partnerships and Coordination

The Joint Programme 6.1 called for close cooperation between different partners at various levels, from the national level down to the district and ward levels. Appropriate structures were provided to ensure coordinated planning, implementation and monitoring of programme activities.

4.6.1 National and Regional Level Coordination Like other Joint Programmes, national strategic guidance and oversight for the JP 6.1 was provided by the Joint GoT/UN Steering Committee. For the specific purposes of the JP 6.1, it was proposed to form a Joint GoT/One UN Regional Forum in each of the two regions covered by the programme. The Regional Forums would be responsible for joint follow-up and oversight in their respective regions. This was considered important because of the fact that the programme supported several districts in each region and there would be need to coordinate programme oversight at regional level. Each Regional Forum would be chaired by the RAS and its membership would include a representative of the PMO-RALG, the respective DEDs, Assistant Regional Administrative Secretaries, a representative of the PUNs (who would be a senior official at the level of agency head), and the JP 6.1 Programme Manager. The Forums would meet on a quarterly basis, or more often as need arose.

However, because there was no project document signed between the GoT and the UN at the inception of the JP 6.1, the proposed Regional Forums were never formally constituted. Consequently, activities implemented under the programme were based on annual work plans and budgets agreed with the respective IPs and signed by the PMO-RALG on behalf of the GoT and by UNDP as the Managing Agent on behalf of the PUNs. According to information obtained during the interviews with various government officials, neither the RAS nor the PMO-RALG was actively involved in providing monitoring and oversight of the JP 6.1 on behalf of the GoT.

During interviews, some government officials expressed concern that the JP 6.1 had failed to adequately recognise the statutory role and mandate of the Regional Administrative Secretariats (RAS), as coordinator and overseer of development activities across the districts under their jurisdiction. Instead, the JP 6.1 had tended to view the RAS as any other IP, while ignoring the office when it came to monitoring and coordinating of JP 6.1 activities in the districts. Some officers in the Regional Administrative Secretariats argued that the JP 6.1 should have set aside funds for them to be able to monitor the programme, rather than expect them to use funds from other votes for that purpose. However, a counter-argument is that, the RAS already have funds allocated to them from the Treasury to cover the costs of monitoring all development activities within their regions and could therefore not expect or request additional funds from the programme for that purpose.

4.6.2 One UN Joint Team All the PUNs on the Joint Programme 6.1 constituted the One UN Joint Team established under the MoU signed during the period November 2008 to January 2009. The purpose of the One UN Joint Team was to ensure a coordinated approach to the implementation, monitoring and reporting of all joint programme activities and that the UN spoke with one voice toward government and non-governmental

34 counterparts in Northwestern Tanzania. In terms of the MoU, the One UN Joint Team was required to hold regular monthly meetings, chaired by the JP 6.1 Programme Manager.

The evidence available shows that, after an uncertain start in late 2008 and 2009, the Kigoma-based PUNs progressively improved their coordination and cooperation. Especially during the last year (2010), the Kigoma-based PUNs held regular programme coordination and planning meetings which were usually attended by representatives of all the agencies with a physical presence in the region (Table 2). The business of these meetings, as reflected in their minutes, included coordination of planning and interactions with the regional governments and the districts, sharing experiences on the challenges of the implementation process, agreeing on common strategies, sharing information and planning for monitoring visits to the IPs, and for the PUNs to provide progress reports to other Team members.

Table 2: JP 6.1 coordination meetings of the One UN Joint Team held in Kigoma

Date of PUNs represented meeting Venue UNDP WFP UNHCR UNICEF UNIDO IOM WHO 25/01/2011 One UN House √ √ √ √ 16/11/2010 One UN House √ √ √ √ √ 28/10/2010 One UN House √ √ √ √ √ √ 08/10/2010 One UN House √ √ √ √ √ 26/08/2010 One UN House √ √ √ √ √ √ 04/08/2010 One UN House √ √ √ √ √ 29/07/2010 One UN House √ √ √ √ √ 30/06/2010 One UN House √ √ √ √ √ 28/05/2010 UNHCR, Kigoma √ √ √ √ √ 19/03/2010 One UN House √ √ √ √ √ 28/01/2009 One UN House √ √ √ √

UN agencies not based in Kigoma attended the coordination meetings in Kigoma only if their representatives happened to be visiting the region. Thus, during 2010 IOM was represented at only two of the meetings and WHO attended only one meeting. After the withdrawal of its staff at the end of 2010, UNIDO was unable to be represented at these joint meetings.

During interviews with representatives of the PUNs in both Dar es Salaam and Kigoma, the reason commonly given for non-attendance at the One UN Joint Team meetings was that the JP 6.1 funds had not provided for Dar es Salaam-based PUNs to travel for meetings in Kigoma. However, notices of forthcoming meetings, agendas and minutes were normally distributed to all the PUNs based in Dar es Salaam through their JP 6.1 focal persons. According to information obtained during discussions with various informants, some Dar es Salaam-based PUNs would follow up on these communications while others did not respond.

While planning was done jointly with the PUNs visiting the IPs together, the same cannot be said in respect of the monitoring of activities. The tendency was for each

35 PUN to conduct field visits on its own to monitor progress and provide technical support to its IPs. Often, the team going out would inform the Programme Manager about the forthcoming field visit and would report back on any particular matter observed while in the field. But the priority of those field visits was on IPs and activities that each PUN was supporting. Thus, while monitoring was clearly being undertaken and contributed to the timely completion of most activities, it was not always done within the spirit of DaO.

Following from this, the impression given to the IPs appeared contradictory, both in terms of activity monitoring by the PUNs as well as fund disbursement mechanisms. Asked about their assessment of DaO under the JP 6.1, some respondents in the IPs could not understand why they were continuing to receive funds from both One UN Fund and parallel funds from individual agencies. They pointed out that they were already using the basket funding system with other development partners and wondered why the UN could not do the same.

Finally, programme coordination in the field was the responsibility of the Programme Manager appointed by UNDP as the MA. A feature of the JP 6.1 was the high turnover of Programme Managers: between January 2009 and June 2011, the post was held by six people. The first Programme Manager arrived in Kigoma around January 2009 just as the implementation of activities was starting and left on expiry of her contract in April 2010. The position remained unfilled until December 2010 when a new manager arrived in Kigoma. The seven-month gap between May and November 2010 was filled by four Acting Programme Managers, three of them temporarily deployed from the UNDP office in Dar es Salaam to Kigoma for short periods each. However, the evidence suggests that, once the initial hurdles had been overcome and activities had started in earnest during 2009, the turnover of Programme Managers did not seem to adversely affect progress. The MA seems to have adequately handled the situation through the temporary deployment of other staff to Kigoma.

4.6.3 Cluster Working Groups Three Cluster Working Groups were created to coordinate the implementation of programme activities and to ensure compliance with government priorities as defined under its poverty reduction strategy, MKUKUTA. Each cluster group was led by a selected participating agency. The cluster lead agencies were responsible for consolidating cluster work plans, progress reports and requests for funds, in collaboration with the other PUNs and IPs in each cluster. The cluster lead agencies reported to the MA through the Programme Manager.

Overall, the cluster working groups experienced varied successes. The success of each group of PUNs and IPs to work as a cluster seemed to depend to a large extent on the commitment of the PUNs to the JP 6.1 and the extent of their involvement with the implementation of activities. Clusters 2 and 3 reported that they had been able to work relatively well in comparison with Cluster 1. Cluster 1 seems to have been beset by several problems. Only one of the five PUNs in the cluster had a continuous presence in Kigoma throughout the duration of the programme. A second PUN in this cluster, although present in Kigoma for a part of the three years, was apparently represented by only one officer for much of the time. That officer left Kigoma and the agency altogether towards the end of 2010. The cluster lead PUN

36 had to coordinate its partners primarily through email with Dar es Salaam-based PUNs. It was not possible to hold regular cluster meetings for just two PUNs; the Dar es Salaam-based PUNs were only able to attend one or two cluster meetings throughout the period. Communication and information sharing between the cluster members based in Kigoma and those in Dar es Salaam was apparently not as efficient or effective, often with requests for information going unanswered for long periods of time. A further complication was that the Cluster 1 coordinator also transferred from Kigoma and subsequently resigned from the lead agency altogether at the end of 2010.

4.6.4 District and Regional Level Coordination In each district council, a focal person was appointed to coordinate JP 6.1 activities being implemented by the various departments and to liaise with the PUNs and the Programme Manager. The JP 6.1 focal person came under the office of the District Executive Director (DED). Departments would also have contact persons assigned to oversee their JP 6.1 activities and to liaise with the focal person in the office of the DED.

The practice of having focal persons at the district level worked reasonably well. The focal persons provided a link between the PUNs and the IPs. They would follow up on requests for information and quarterly FACE reports from the PUNs and the cluster coordinators. Two major challenges were reported during discussions with various informants. The first was that the IPs often had difficulties in preparing and submitting their quarterly FACE reports on time and to an acceptable standard. The second problem reported was that of changes of personnel assigned to serve as focal persons. This tended to affect coordination and the flow of information between the IPs and the PUNs.

The two Regional Administrative Secretariats also appointed their own JP 6.1 focal persons who liaised with the Programme Manager and with the PUNs in connection with implementation of their own activities as IPs. However, as explained earlier, the focal persons at the regional levels and within the PMO-RALG felt that they had been left out of the communication loop with the district councils and the flow of information to them had not been satisfactory or consistent.

4.6.5 Overall Assessment of DaO under the JP 6.1 Although it was not the primary aim of this evaluation to assess the success or otherwise in the functioning of the DaO mechanisms under the JP 6.1, there are some useful lessons that, as stated in the TOR, can serve to inform the UN in Tanzania and the GoT on ways of improving the implementation and performance of the One Programme. Reference has already been made in the preceding sections to the various factors that favoured or adversely affected the spirit of DaO. These include: (i) the level of commitment of the PUNs to the JP 6.1 and to working in NWT; (ii) the readiness of the PUNs to deploy staff to Kigoma to oversee implementation of the activities they were supporting; (iii) the various mechanisms for cooperation and partnerships between the PUNs themselves and between them and the IPs; and (iv) the extent to which the JP 6.1 represented a departure from the PUNs’ traditional modus operandi; some PUNs have historically worked at national

37 level while others have a tradition of working at sub-national and community levels.

It is also useful to comment, albeit subjectively as this was not specifically within the scope of the evaluation, on the performance of the JP 6.1 against the DaO process indicators. A summary of the performance of the JP 6.1 is given in the 2010 annual report of the UN Resident Coordinator and the JP 6.1 annual reports for 2009 and 2010. This was supported by interviews with key informants during the course of the evaluation.

 % of JP 6.1 support on the government budget: according to the UN Resident Coordinator’s annual report and the JP 6.1 annual report for 2010, 75% of the support (One UN funds and parallel funds) was reported on the government budget in 2010, up from 70% the previous year.  % of the JP budget channelled through the Exchequer: in 2010, 75% of the JP 6.1 budget was channelled through the Exchequer system, again up from 70% the previous year.  % of JP funds using public procurement systems: all procurement (100%) was done using the public procurement systems - the use of the public procurement systems was discussed earlier as being one of the factors contributing towards greater programme efficiency and effectiveness.  % of the JP budget channelled through the Managing Agent: the entire JP 6.1 budget (100%) for national execution was channelled through the MA.  % of joint analytic works were undertaken under the JP: 100% - PUNs and IPs jointly reviewed and prepared annual work plans and, as discussed previously, the annual work plans were approved by both the PMO-RALG on behalf of the GoT and by UNDP as the MA on behalf of the UN.  % of joint field missions involving a) HQ personnel and b) no HQ personnel: 100% - all field missions were carried out jointly between PUNs and IPs. No HQ staff were involved in the field missions. Given the structure of the programme in which the IPs were the ones responsible for actual implementation, it would not have been feasible for the PUNs to undertake field missions on their own.  % of IPs using FACE to request quarterly disbursements: all IPs in the JP 6.1 were using FACE to report on activities and to request for disbursement of funds. However, as mentioned earlier, delays were sometimes experienced in the submission of the FACE reports from the IPs and this required follow-up by the PUNs and the cluster coordinators.

4.7 Cross-cutting Issues

The UN in Tanzania incorporated five cross-cutting principles in its One Programme design in 2008, namely (i) Human Rights-Based Approach, (ii) Gender Equality, (iii) Environmental Sustainability, (iv) Results-Based Management, and (v) Capacity Building. At the design of the JP 6.1, it was agreed that each cluster would address at least five cross-cutting issues within its activities of support of the IPs. The JP 6.1 brought together a dozen agencies that have a large and diverse pool of expertise and experiences. This pooling of resources has enabled the programme to address all five cross-cutting issues observed by UN Tanzania, plus HIV/AIDS. The latter was included as a cross-cutting issue in this evaluation as stipulated in the TOR.

38

Gender equality: Gender mainstreaming has been a feature of the outputs planned and implemented in all three clusters. Their aim was to bring about greater participation of previously marginalized groups, especially women, youths and children, in the planning and implementation of activities for their benefit. The programme sought to raise gender awareness among all categories of stakeholders in NWT, including public officials, community leaders as well as villagers. Activities aimed at addressing gender equality include the training of village, ward and district officials on gender mainstreaming in development planning and budgeting; community awareness raising through radio programmes; the establishment of both co-educational and girls-only secondary schools; and the promotion of “TUSEME” (Speak Out) clubs in primary schools to provide a forum for pupils to speak out on issues that affect them, including girls.

“TUSEME” clubs are already well established in the target schools; the number of girls attending both co-educational and girls-only secondary schools has increased. Women are being incorporated into village land committees. As shown in Appendix 4, both males and females were represented in the focus group discussions held with community leaders during the course of information gathering for the evaluation, evidence of their increased incorporation into local leadership roles. Districts have been encouraged to include gender aspects when preparing fund requests and facilitating implementation of development activities. However, the impact of training in gender mainstreaming in planning and budgeting by the districts remains to be realised more fully, although there is now greater awareness among LGA officials at all levels regarding the need for it.

Human rights-based approach: The rights based approach (HRBA) argues for fair and equitable development and that the state or duty bearers have an obligation to intervene on behalf of poor and vulnerable groups (rights holders), recognising that participation in, and enjoyment of the benefits of, development is a right of every individual in society. HRBA provides a mechanism for assessing the capacities of both duty bearers and rights holders, identifying the capacity gaps that require attention in order that the rights of all individuals to participate in development are realised.

Duty bearers (i.e. LGA officials, village and ward leaders) in NWT are now more aware of their responsibilities towards the rights of others. This is demonstrated by various outputs of the JP 6.1 such as nutritional support to HIV/AIDS patients, the inclusion of women in training on planning and gender mainstreaming, child protection activities, protection of persons with albinism and support for their education, and the establishment of secondary schools catering for girls. Likewise, the collaboration with the district councils in the rehabilitation and construction of social services in the former refugee camps to benefit the hosting communities was guided by the HRBA principles for rights holders and duty bearers. The training given to migration officials, the police and other local officials on migration management and the rights of asylum seekers is another example of the use of the rights-based approach by the JP 6.1.

However, evidence that rights holders were always included in the planning of activities intended to benefit them is weak and inconclusive. For instance, some

39 beneficiaries (e.g. in the land use planning sites, and head teachers and staff at the new schools), reported that they were not always fully involved or consulted by the district council officials, especially in the planning stages (see Box 5 above).

Environmental sustainability: The demarcation of village boundaries and land use planning was aimed at addressing problems of environmental degradation and reducing disputes over land. When the process of land use planning is completed and final plans are registered with the Commissioner for Lands, the affected village councils will have title and become responsible for the management of their lands. The training of village and ward leaders and LGA officers on environmental management legislation, EIAs and related issues was aimed at raising their capacity for management and protection of their environment. The establishment of biogas plants to provide power for agro-processing machinery and the installation of solar power also seek to protect the environment through reduction in deforestation.

HIV/AIDS: HIV/AIDS affects communities in diverse ways, by affecting both those infected with the virus as well as their care givers and other supporters. The latter groups include local authorities that have a responsibility to provide services in support of HIV/AIDS sufferers. Therefore, programmes that seek to address the HIV/AIDS pandemic must take account of the different support needs of these different stakeholders. JP 6.1 sought to support these different categories of stakeholders: (i) training of health workers on PMTCT and PITC, (ii) procurement of treatment guidelines for HIV/AIDS for distribution to health facilities, (iii) awareness raising about HIV/AIDS among community members, village leaders, school children and LGA officers, and (iv) the provision of nutrition support to eligible HIV/AIDS patients.

Capacity development: Capacity development among the IPs was at the core of the JP 6.1. Capacity development was implemented through (i) training workshops for LGA officers, from the regional governments and district councils down to ward and village leaders, (ii) on-site monitoring and supervision of IPs by the PUNs during implementation of planned activities, as well as (iii) awareness raising and education among communities about various rights issues (e.g. child abuse, human trafficking, community health and WASH).

However, concern was raised by some senior officials at the regional and district levels about the preponderance of training workshops as the main approach to capacity development. It was feared that this was inculcating a culture of repeated absence from their workstations by staff attending training workshops, with little time being given to putting into practice their newly acquired knowledge. There was need to review the training modality and come up with more innovative capacity development approaches that reinforced “learning by doing”.

Results-based management: RBM is a way of working that looks beyond activities and outputs to focus on actual results, i.e. the outcomes of projects and programmes, implementing performance measurement, learning and adapting, as well as reporting performance. Assessment of the application of RBM approaches under the JP 6.1 entails not just considering whether the PUNs complied or not, but also whether they in turn were actively encouraging and promoting those principles to their IPs.

40

There are several indicators to show the use of RBM approaches under the JP 6.1. For instance, all IPs were required to comply with the FACE reporting arrangements under which they were to report on outputs, rather than just on inputs provided and activities conducted. Likewise, reports compiled by the PUNs and cluster coordinators to the Programme Manager and the MA were also expected to focus on outputs and outcomes. The annual programme reports focussing on outputs and outcomes also show the use of RBM approaches. Likewise, the review and re- allocation of funds conducted towards the end of 2010 was evidence of the application of results-based management by the JP 6.1

41 5.0 CONCLUSION, LESSONS LEARNED AND RECOMMENDATIONS

5.1 Conclusion

The overall objective of the Joint Programme 6.1 was to support the LGAs and communities in NWT in making the transition from a humanitarian aid environment to sustainable development. The outputs of the programme were both needed and timely. The JP 6.1 was a complex programme, broad in scope and diversity, and involved a wide range of players and partners. What has been achieved in the space of three years is quite impressive. If all the planned activities, such as those in Cluster I, been carried out, much more could have been achieved.

In terms of relevancy and impact, the diversity of its outputs targeted at different groups and different levels has helped to build consensus, and produced tangible benefits across a wide spectrum of beneficiaries. A strong positive for the programme is that it worked with existing government structures and did not try to create additional or parallel structures that would have competed with those already on the ground. Some gaps and missed opportunities were noted, such as the by- passing of the RAS from its mandatory supervisory role over development activities in the districts.

With regard to efficiency and effectiveness, a lot has been achieved by a relatively small team of staff in most of the PUNs. For the few staff involved with the programme, managing such a diverse and complex range of outputs called for good coordination and hard work.

The main question that remains unanswered now is whether these positive impacts will be continued after the end of the programme. This raises the issue of sustainability of the outputs and achievements of the programme.

The overall conclusion is that the programme has made a significant contribution in supporting the regional and local government authorities to address the pressing needs for effecting the transition from a humanitarian aid environment to sustainable development in NWT.

5.2 Lessons Learned

Identification of lessons learned during the planning, implementation and monitoring of a programme is indicative of a learning organisation. The lessons learned can then be replicated or avoided in future programmes or transferred to other regions and countries as appropriate.

The following are the key lessons from the Joint Programme 6.1:

Linkages with LGAs:  The use of existing government structures and local development plans contributed to ensuring ownership of the programme by the LGAs and the beneficiary communities. It set the LGAs on the road to implementing on their own the transition from a humanitarian aid environment to sustainable development.

42  The statutory role of the Regional Administrative Secretariats as overseers and coordinators of development in districts under their jurisdiction was not adequately recognised by the JP 6.1. There was a tendency to view the office of the RAS as just another IP, on par with the district councils.  There was need for structured consultation mechanisms between the UN and the LGAs in the form of the Regional Forums.

Programme Planning:  The absence of a project document setting out the programme’s objectives and targets resulted in a lack of continuity due to the constant change of activities such that what was planned at inception was not necessarily followed through to the end of the programme. There was need for an agreed and approved project document elaborating the operational modalities, division of responsibilities especially between the PUNs and the MA for accountability purposes, reporting channels as well as M&E arrangements.  Experience from the JP 6.1 showed the importance of closely aligning development assistance with the annual planning cycle of the different levels in the governmental hierarchical structure. Both the GoT and development partners should ensure that the disbursement of funds takes place at a time in the planning cycle when the IPs are best able to implement the agreed activities.

Coordination and Partnerships:  The number of stakeholders involved in the JP 6.1 was large and this entailed a substantial demand on coordination. There is need for more streamlined programmes in the future.  Delivering as One on future joint programmes is going to require significant review of the traditional operational modalities of the different UN agencies and a change of mindsets. For instance, some agencies have a tradition of working at community level and, for them, the transition from single-agency work to multi-agency partnerships under JP 6.1 was relatively easier. The presence of these PUNs in Kigoma was a contributing factor for the success of the JP 6.1. Other agencies have traditionally worked at higher, national policy, levels and the requirements of JP 6.1 to work at district and community levels presented major challenges.

Capacity Development:  Although capacity development has been done in several ways, the predominant modality was through out-of-office workshops and seminars. There is concern that excessive use of this modality inhibits internalisation of the newly acquired skills through learning by doing. There is need to identify new and innovative approaches to capacity building that enable the trainees to internalise their new skills, for instance through some form of on-the-job mentoring.

5.3 Recommendations

Recommendations from the JP 6.1 are directed at two parties, the GoT (including the LGAs) on the one hand and the UN on the other.

43 5.3.1 Recommendations for the GoT The following recommendations are directed at the Government of Tanzania and its regional and district authorities. (i) In future, the GoT should ensure that each new programme has an agreed and endorsed project document with an adequately comprehensive M&E framework.

(ii) There is need for the GoT to quickly secure funds from internal resources or from DPs and to ensure that those outputs that have not yet been completed and are not yet operational are brought into use as soon as possible.

(iii) There is need for the Treasury to review its procedures for disbursements to the IPs so that funds are received more quickly in order to avoid delaying in implementation of planned activities.

(iv) The relevant planning authorities in the GoT should review the effectiveness of the current approaches to capacity development and consider adoption of alternative modalities besides the standard workshops and seminars. One possibility is on-the-job mentoring by technical experts/facilitators provided for short periods (e.g. reviewing development plans and budgets for gender mainstreaming with a district’s planning officers over a couple of days at their workplace). This will help the staff to internalise and put into practice their new skills and knowledge.

(v) At present, there is little to show recognition of the contribution by the UN to the transition from a humanitarian aid environment to sustainable development in NWT. The GoT should consider ways of publicly acknowledging that contribution. This may be in the form of plaques on the walls of buildings constructed with JP 6.1 support or at the main entrances (gates) to the schools and health facilities.

5.3.2 Recommendations for the UN in Tanzania The following recommendations are directed at the UN in Tanzania, including the PUNs. (i) In future, the UN should ensure that the statutory coordination and supervisory role of the regional administrative structures is appropriately recognised. They should not be viewed primarily as any other IPs. Inclusion of the RAS will also contribute to ensuring LGA ownership and sustainability of planned activities.

(ii) In future, the UN should ensure that each new programme has a project document agreed and signed with the GoT and that the document includes an adequately comprehensive M&E framework.

(iii) There is need for the UN to develop a short-term strategy to support the completion of those outputs that are not yet operational where the IPs have not been able to secure the necessary resources to bring them into use. This is the time (following the recent publication of the national 2011/2012 budget) for the UN to discuss with the LGAs, assess the remaining resource requirements to bring those outputs into use, what has been allocated for their

44 completion by the Treasury, and agree on what further resources are required from the UN.

(iv) The evidence suggests that the development needs of NWT are enormous and cannot be addressed within the framework of a three-year transitional support programme. As a longer term strategy, the UN should continue to include NWT as a priority area for assistance under the new UNDAP (2011- 2015).

(v) However, future programmes should be less ambitious than the just ended JP 6.1 and should be more focused in both scope and anticipated outcomes as well as in the number of stakeholders directly involved with implementation.

(vi) The UN should engage the Treasury in finding ways of speeding up procedures for disbursement of funds to IPs in order to avoid delaying the implementation of planned activities.

(vii) The UN needs to review its approach to capacity development for IPs, with less emphasis on the workshops and seminars. One possibility is on-the-job mentoring by technical experts/facilitators provided for short periods (e.g. reviewing development plans and budgets for gender mainstreaming with a district’s planning officers over a couple of days at their workplace). This will help the staff to internalise and put into practice their new skills and knowledge.

(viii) For future Joint Programmes, the participating UN agencies should be seen to be Delivering as One at all times. There is need to review and strengthen mechanisms for joint monitoring, joint missions to the IPs, and speaking with one voice rather than as individual agencies.

45 Appendix 1

Joint Programme 6.1 – Transition from Humanitarian Assistance to Sustainable Development

End of Programme Evaluation

1. Background of the Joint Programme

Northwestern Tanzania has historically hosted refugees fleeing from internal conflicts in their countries. The large-scale humanitarian operation, established to respond to the massive refugee influxes, has had an impact on the development of the area. As the withdrawal of the organizations and people involved in the humanitarian operation will have considerable repercussions and consequences on the local economy of the Districts that hosted refugee camps, a joint UN programme which aims at supporting the Regional and Local Governments Authorities to address the transition from the humanitarian aid environment to sustainable development process in North Western Tanzania was developed and launched in early 2008. The joint programme (JP 6.1) is implemented in Kigoma DC, Kasulu DC, Kibondo DC, Ngara DC, and Karagwe DC. In addition to district-specific activities, the programme also provides capacity development support at the regional levels in Kigoma and Kagera.

All three clusters under the national development framework, the MKUKUTA, are being targeted in the programme. Cluster I: Strengthen stakeholders’ capacity in the two regions for economic planning, employment creation, and agriculture and market improvement. Cluster II: Improving stakeholders’ access in target districts to basic Primary Health Care services, knowledge of key health practices, standard malnutrition treatment, improved household water and sanitation, and quality education – also through the increased benefits received from the rehabilitation of the assets from the former refugee camps. Cluster III: Strengthening Government capacity in planning and analysis, border management, land conflict management, sustainable use of natural resources, rule of law, and gender aspects.

The JP 6.1 builds on previous interventions several participating UN agencies. UNHCR, WFP as well as UNICEF have had longstanding and large scale humanitarian operations benefiting refugees in both Kigoma and Kagera regions in thirteen camps – at its peak close to ½ mio refugees received support. The forerunner of the JP 6.1 was the joint Human Security program 2006-2008 with participation of UNDP, FAO, UNIDO, UNICEF, UNHCR, and WFP supporting refugee hosting communities.

Specifically the JP 6.1 aims to achieve the following selected key results:

Cluster I: Wealth Creation and Income Generation  Systems and procedures as well as facilitating conducive environment for Local Economic Development initiatives enhanced;  Food Security Initiatives promoted and supported;  Small scale agro-food processing technologies addressed to organized groups improved.

46 Cluster II: Social Services  Capacity of LGAs to deliver quality Primary Health Care services enhanced;  Comprehensive management of major communicable diseases (TB, HIV/AIDS, Malaria and others) strengthened in target districts;  Quality education in target district improved;  Community capacity to manage water sources and improve household water management enhanced;  Improved and converted assets in the former refugee camps for delivery of social services undertaken;  Access to care, support, protection and HIV prevention services for vulnerable groups including MVC enhanced.

Cluster III: Governance and Natural Resources Management  Planning and M&E capacity at Regional and District level strengthen with particular emphasis on gender sensitive budgeting and implementation;  Management of migration and immigration procedures and infrastructure improved;  Sustainable Management of natural resources and conflicts enhanced in target areas;  Access to justice for the vulnerable groups enhanced.

2. Purpose and Use

The purpose of this evaluation is to assess the achievement of results (outputs and outcomes) of the Joint Programme 6.1 in North Western Tanzania achieved since its commencement in 2008. More specifically, the evaluation aims to:

 Assess the appropriateness, relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact and sustainability of the Joint Programme 6.1;  Identify lessons learned and draw conclusions which may inform other interventions and which can contribute to decision making processes of the UN, GoT and partners.

The primary audience for the JP 6.1 evaluation is the Government of Tanzania (GoT) and the UN in Tanzania. Secondary audiences include interested parties in Tanzania (implementing partners and development partners), other UN DaO Pilot countries and UNHQ.

3. Programme Duration

Joint Programme 6.1 was designed to run from July 2008 to June 2011

4. Programme Budget

The total budget for the programme is as follows:  One UN Fund 5,546,437.65  Parallel Funds 2,923,697.00  Total 8,470,134.65

47 5. Scope

The Joint Programme evaluation is an independent evaluation to be completed prior to the completion of the program in order to provide inputs to the development of the United National Development Assistance Program (UNDAP 2011-2015) as well as any specific activities or programs which might succeed the JP 6.1 in NWT.

The evaluation involves the systematic and objective assessment of the entire Joint Programme 6.1 in all the districts of its coverage both in Kigoma and Kagera Regions, its design, implementation and results since its inception. This assessment is made of the entire programme regardless of funding source (One Fund or PUN parallel funds).

6. Evaluation Criteria and Questions

Based on the objectives of the evaluation, the following criteria and questions are expected to guide without limiting the evaluation team in creation of the evaluation framework, information collection and actual assessment:

Relevance/Appropriateness • How relevant were the Joint Programme 6.1 outputs and outcomes in assisting the achievement of Tanzania’s national development goals? • To what extent was J.P 6.1 in North West Tanzania required? How relevant was the J.P 6.1 to the district planning priorities? • What evidence is there for evidence based programming (i.e. information generated from situation analysis translated into a response in an appropriate manner). • To what extent was the planning of interventions participatory with district authorities?

Efficiency • To what extent did UN agencies plan together? Did the plans demonstrate coherence and delivering as one? • To what extent were the management and administrative set up necessary and adequate to deliver the Joint Programme? • To what extent was the Joint Programme cost effective, in terms of reducing transaction costs internally as well as externally? • Were the institutional and management arrangements supportive to attainment of the intended objectives? Did the PUNs position the appropriate human resource capacity to reflect the strategic orientation of the programme? • How efficiently has the Joint Programme 6.1 delivered its outputs and outcomes? • How did the specific JP. 6.1 organizational setup (Dar based agencies and Kigoma based agencies) contribute or hinder effective coordination and implementation? • How were the funding modalities used by the UN appropriate, including use of national systems for disbursement?

48 Effectiveness • To what extent did the UN agencies implement and monitor interventions together? • What are the key drivers for achievement / constraints? • What has been the effectiveness of the J.P 6.1 with respect to planned outcomes and impact on refugees and host communities? • How could J.P 6.1 have been more effective and achieved greater impact on targeted communities? • Were the programme objectives and activities designed in such a way that activities were able to meet the objectives around transition from humanitarian assistance to sustainable development? • What impact has the cluster approach with identified agencies as leads in supporting Government efforts of the Joint Programme 6.1 had on implementation arrangements as well as attainment of outcomes? • What factors favourably or adversely affected the spirit of Delivering as One?

Programme Outcome/Impact: - What results (outputs and outcomes) has the Joint Programme 6.1 achieved since its commencement? - Has the programme made a difference to the lives of host communities? - How are impacts different according to gender, age and other vulnerability category (e.g. disability)?

Sustainability: - How sustainable is the progress made and achievements of the Joint Programme 6.1? • What are the major factors which have influenced the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency and sustainability of the J.P6.1? • Has there been connectedness between the transition from humanitarian assistance to sustainable development? • What is the exit/longer term strategy for sustainable development? • What approaches are the J.P PUNs taking to the building of national capacities? How effective are these approaches?

Partnerships and Coordination • What are the key lessons learned from the Joint Programme 6.1 and how can they inform future UN, GoT and DP decision making processes? • What factors favourably or adversely affected the spirit of delivering as one? • What links exist between national and field level coordination (including the cluster approach)? • Are there any critical technical gaps in the coordination structures? • What impact has the cluster approach had on implementation arrangements as well as attainment of outcomes?

Cross-cutting Issues • Were cross – cutting considerations mainstreamed in the implementation of activities? • To what extent did the programme involve the host communities and other stakeholders in programme design and implementation?

49 • Were the capacity development activities informed by capacity assessment at different levels? • To what extent was the local context with respect to Gender Equality, Human Rights Based Approach, Environmental Sustainability, HIV/AIDS, Capacity Development and Results Based Management taken into consideration when the J.P. 6.1 was designed?

Lessons Learned & Recommendations • What additional measures if any could have improved the relevance, effectiveness, efficiency, impact or sustainability of the JP? • What lessons can be applied in the collaborative programme planning, implementation and monitoring of the UNDAP 2011-2015? • What key measures can the UN in Tanzania, regionally and at HQ, plus the Government of Tanzania and Development Partners adopt to improve the implementation and performance of the One Programme under DaO?

7. Approach

Outlined below are the expected evaluation process, timeframe, methodology and costs.

Evaluation Process

The evaluation process is expected to contain three phases: inception, data collection; and analysis and reporting.

Inception Phase - the evaluation team will review existing documentation, meet with the evaluation commissioners and prepare a brief inception report (which includes a detailed evaluation work plan, matrix and tools).

Data Collection – the evaluation team will gather data from sources such as interviews with key informants and review of relevant documents.

Analysis and Reporting – the evaluation team will analyze data and prepare the evaluation report over a three week period. This involves preparing the preliminary report based on the analysis of findings, submitting the report key stakeholders for factual review as well as presenting the findings and conclusions to stakeholders and gathering feedback. From this process the final report with sections e.g. a minimum 2 pages executive summary containing key findings and recommendations; a maximum of one page background; an Introduction; the approach employed for data collection and analysis; findings, conclusions; recommendations; Lessons Learned and annexes will be prepared and presented to relevant stakeholders in Kigoma.

Evaluation methods

During the Inception phase, the evaluation team will formulate in detail the methodology for the evaluation which will be informed by the key methodological principles below:  The evaluation is results focused;

50  The evaluation will adopt a consultative, iterative and transparent approach with stakeholders;  Triangulation of information and data across groups of stakeholders and individuals will be the key method to validate evidence, throughout the whole evaluation process;  The evaluation is cost-effective;  The evaluation will strictly adhere to the UNEG Norms & Standards.

The evaluation will use a wide range of methods and tools, adapted to the national context and to the evaluation questions. They may include, but are not limited to, the following:  Debriefing sessions with the stakeholders (inception, data collection, analysis phases);  Evaluation matrix relating evaluation issues and questions to evaluation criteria, indicators, sources of information and methods of data collection (inception phase);  Mapping exercise of the main focus areas of the Joint Programme work (inception phase);  Desk review of reference documents (inception and data collection phase);  Individual and group interviews with stakeholders including representatives from Government, JP Steering Committee (and other JP management structures), JP Implementing partners, DPs, UN Agencies, UN Resident Coordinator’s Office, One Fund Administrative Agent (data collection phase);  Checklists or semi-structured interview protocols for each type of interview (inception phase);  Establishment of historical causality: a time-line and narrative about the milestone events in the DaO process at country and international level (inception and data collection phase);  Field observation (data collection phase);  Thematic studies on specific areas of focus of the Joint Programme, as relevant and appropriate (data collection phase).  Lessons learning workshop which brings together all the key stakeholders and implementers of the programme (what worked well, and, why? what didn’t work well, and, why? what can we learn and what can we do about it in future).

8. Deliverables

The following deliverables are expected: i. An inception report: the evaluation team shall prepare an inception report (suggested 10 pages excluding annexes) containing a detailed work plan, review of literature, interpretation of the suggested evaluation questions and observations on their evaluability, Identification of key informants; detailed methods, draft instruments and reasons for their selection and an evaluation matrix. ii. Presentation of and preliminary findings: At the end of the field work, the evaluation team will present their draft findings and provisional recommendations. The evaluation team will also make a PowerPoint presentation summarizing the main findings recommendations and lessons learned and conclusions

51 iii. Draft Report: The evaluation team will prepare a draft report for comments by stakeholders. This should be a focused document containing an executive summary, background, introduction findings, conclusions, recommendations, lessons learned and annexes. It should also clearly state the limitations of the methodology followed. iv. Final Report: Based on the comments received from stakeholders, the evaluation team shall submit four hard copies and an electronic version of the final report.

9. Timeframe

It is estimated that the evaluation team will conduct their work over 30 working days, commencing from 2 May 2011. Below is a suggested indicative timeline for the phases and deliverables of the evaluation. i Inception: 5 days ii Fieldwork: 20 days iii Reporting and presentation: 5 days

10. Stakeholder Involvement

There are a range of country-level stakeholders with an interest in the Joint Programme 6.1 including UN agencies and staff, implementing partners including the Government of Tanzania and non-government organizations, and development partners who are providing funds to the One Fund.

Stakeholders will be asked to support the evaluation by facilitating access to information (such as documents and people) and providing information directly to the evaluation team. The UNCT will also provide additional logistical support to the evaluation team as per the contract and contribute in-kind support (for example, office space).

Annex A contains a broad list of stakeholder groups. The evaluation team may use this list to develop a more specific list of consultations to take place throughout the evaluation.

11. Accountabilities and Responsibilities

The following section outlines the evaluation management responsibilities as well as those of the evaluation team.

In its role as Managing Agent and thus as facilitator, the UNDP Country Office will, in close consultation with the Prime Minister’s Office Regional Administration and Local Government (PMORALG), and the Participating UN Agencies, (PUNs) commission the evaluation manager and oversee the process, assuring the independence of the evaluation and that the final product complies with the highest standards in evaluation. UNDP will provide secretariat support to the Commissioners, and be responsible for:  Assessing the tenders and managing the consultant recruitment process of the independent evaluation team  Overseeing the evaluation process throughout its entire duration

52  Managing the evaluation budget including drafting financial reports.  Designing a schedule of visits in consultation with the UN joint team, PMORALG and relevant Regions and Districts.  Facilitating the work of the independent evaluation team by ensuring that all relevant contacts and information are available.  Coordinating stakeholder workshops in consultation with key stakeholders, and the evaluation team including, among other things: drafting the agenda, identifying materials for consultation and distribution, coordinating with participants; and drafting the stakeholder report.

In similar consultation with PMORALG and the PUNs as already mentioned above, the UNDP Country Office will also prepare a management response on the final evaluation report.

There will be a quality assurance committee whose members will be from UNIDO, UNICEF, UNHCR, UNDP, AND PMORALG and whose main duty will be to put in place a plan for quality assurance; facilitate the review of the evaluation process products including ensuring that the views of stakeholders are considered during the evaluation; and to ensure adherence to the norms and standards of UNEG.

12. Qualifications

The evaluation team will be comprised of two (2) evaluation professionals, 1 international and 1 national consultant) who, as a team, have a solid understanding of the national context, the Joint Programme focus area and a proven track record of conducting evaluations in a professional manner. To the extent possible the composition of the evaluation team will be gender balanced and utilize regionally based expertise. Full competency in English (written and spoken) is required. Kiswahili will be considered an advantage. The evaluation team is expected to be fully self-sufficient in terms of IT/office equipment, stationary, communication, office space, accommodation, transport and other logistics. Specifically, the team members’ qualifications are expected to be as outlined below.

The international consultant should have the following qualifications:  Master’s degree in international development, public administration, evaluation or related field.  A minimum of 10 years of professional experience specifically in the area of evaluation of international development initiatives and development organizations.  Substantial international track record of conducting different types of evaluations, including process, outcome and impact evaluations in different countries and organizations.  Experience in M&E of cross-cutting issues including human rights, gender and culture.  Knowledge and experience of the UN System and the UN Reform process.  Understanding of the development context in Tanzania and/or other ‘Delivering as One’ countries would be a clear advantage.  Excellent communication and interview skills.  Excellent report writing skills.

53  Demonstrated ability to deliver quality results within strict deadlines.

The national consultant should have the following qualifications:  Master’s degree in international development, public administration, evaluation or related field.  A minimum of seven years of professional experience, specifically in the area of monitoring and evaluation of international development initiatives and development organizations.  A track record of conducting various types of evaluations, including process, outcome and impact evaluations in Tanzania and preferably in the region.  Experience in M&E of cross-cutting issues including human rights, gender and culture.  Knowledge and experience of the UN System and the UN Reform process.  In-depth understanding of the development context in Tanzania.  Excellent communication and interview skills.  Excellent report writing skills.  Demonstrated ability to deliver quality results within strict deadlines.

13. Responsibilities

The evaluation team will be responsible for conducting the evaluation. This entails among other responsibilities designing the evaluation according to the specific terms of reference; gathering data from different sources of information; analysing and systematizing the information; identifying patterns and causal linkages that explain current performance; drafting evaluation reports at different stages (inception, drafts, final); responding to comments and factual corrections from stakeholders and incorporating them, as appropriate, in subsequent versions; addressing comments by the external Quality Assurance Panel; and making briefs and presentations ensuring the evaluation findings, conclusions and recommendations are communicated in a coherent, clear and understandable manner once the report is completed. All reports shall be written in English. The Evaluation team is responsible for editing and quality control and the final report should be presented in a way that directly enables publication.

54 Appendix 2: Work Plan

Days Date Activities Outputs 1 Monday  Evaluation commencement 09/05/2011  Meetings with Programme Management Team  Review of literature commences  Development of data collection tools 2 Tuesday  Review of literature commences 10/05/2011  Development of data collection  Interview with RCO representative 3 Wednesday  Group meeting with PUN Focal Persons  Interview Guides for (i) Central 11/05/2011  Meeting with Country Director Government Officials, (ii) LGA  Review of literature (cont’d) Officials, (iii) UN Agencies  Revising Action Plan and finalising data collection tools  Guide for FGD with communities 4 Thursday  Interviews with WHO and ILO focal persons 12/05/2011  Preparation of Evaluation Matrix 5 Friday  Interviews with UNESCO and UNCDF focal persons 13/05/2011  Interview with MCDGC focal person  Preparation of Inception Report

6 Monday  Submission of Draft Inception Report  Draft Inception Report 16/05/2011  Interview with MoEVT focal person for special needs education 7 Tuesday  Travel to Kigoma via Mwanza (air) 17/05/2011  Interview IOM focal person at Mwanza airport  Meeting with Programme Manager and team in Kigoma 8 Wednesday  Interview DC for Kigoma District/Acting Regional Commissioner 18/05/2011  Interview with Acting RAS, Kigoma Region  Interview with WFP Kigoma staff  Review of documents in Kigoma office 9 Thursday  Interviews with Kigoma RAS focal persons for JP 6.1 19/05/2011  Group introductory meeting with UN agencies in Kigoma  Interview with UNHCR Kigoma staff  Interviews with UNICEF Kigoma staff 10 Friday  Morning: field visit to Lugufu Girls Secondary and Boys Secondary Schools 20/05/2011  Afternoon: interviews with DED and staff, Kigoma District

55 11 Monday  Morning: travel to Kasulu District 23/05/2011  Interview with DED and staff, Kasulu District  Field visit to Kasulu FDC, Kabanga Special Primary School, Muyovosi Health Centre and Shunga Village  Overnight in Kasulu 12 Tuesday  Morning: travel to Kibondo District 24/05/2011  Interview with DED and staff, Kibondo District  Field visit to Kisogwe Dispensary, Mkugwa Girls High School, “TUSEME” primary schools clubs, Kazilamihunda Village, Kasanda Dispensary, Kibondo District Hospital, and Nengo Special Needs Primary School  Overnight in Kibondo 13 Wednesday  Morning: travel to Ngara 25/05/2011  Interview with DED and staff, Ngara District  Field visit to Lukole Health Centre, K9 High School,  Overnight in Ngara 14 Thursday  Morning: field visit to Nakatunga Primary School, Ngara District 26/05/2011  Mid-morning: travel to Karagwe District  Interview with DED and staff, Karagwe District  Field visit to Kigando and Nyaishozi Primary Schools, Karagwe District VTC  Overnight in Karagwe 15 Friday  Morning: field visit to Nyakaiga Village, Karagwe District 27/05/2011  Afternoon: travel to Bukoba

16 Monday  Interview with RAS, Kagera Region and staff 30/05/2011  Overnight in Bukoba 17 Tuesday  Travel from Bukoba to Kigoma 31/05/2011 18 Wednesday  Field visit to Ilagala, Kigoma District 01/06/2011 19 Thursday  Morning: preparation for de-briefing for PUNs based in Kigoma 02/06/2011  Afternoon: de-briefing for PUNs based in Kigoma 20 Friday  Reviewing and analysing information and data 03/06/2011

21 Monday  Interview with UNIDO 06/06/2011  Analysing information and data 22 Tuesday  Interview with MoEVT focal person for VET

56 07/06/2011  Afternoon: de-briefing to UNDP 23 Wednesday  Reviewing and analysing information and data 08/06/2011  Afternoon: travel from Dar es Salaam to Dodoma 24 Thursday  Morning: interview with PMO-RALG in Dodoma 09/06/2011  Afternoon: analysing information and preparation of draft report 25 Friday  Travel from Dodoma to Dar es Salaam 10/06/2011

26 Monday  Preparation of draft evaluation report Draft Evaluation Report 13/06/2011  Submission of draft evaluation report 27 Tuesday  Presentation of evaluation findings to stakeholders Presentation to stakeholders 14/06/2011 Thursday  Receive comments from Programme Management Team/UNDP 23/06/2011  Submission of revised draft evaluation report Revised Draft Evaluation Report  Submission of final evaluation report Final Evaluation Report

57 Appendix 3: Evaluation Matrix

Evaluation Criterion 1: Relevance/appropriateness of the programme

Data sources and collection Evaluation questions Indicators methods Progress achieved and comments 1. How relevant were the JP 6.1  JP 6.1 outputs and outcomes  JP 6.1 programme inception and outputs and outcomes in assisting address priorities identified in GoT planning documents the achievement of Tanzania’s development plans (MKUKUTA)  GoT development plans national development goals?  Number of GoT/UN One meetings (MKUKUTA) held  Minutes of meetings 2. To what extent was JP 6.1 in NWT  JP 6.1 outputs and outcomes  Regional and district development required? How relevant was JP 6.1 address priorities identified in plans to the district planning priorities? regional and district development  Interviews with regional and district plans officials 3. What evidence is there for  Programme documents were  Programme documents and evidence-based programming (i.e. prepared and are available situation analysis report information generated from  Situation analysis was conducted  Regional and district development situation analysis translated into a prior to design of JP 6.1 plans response in an appropriate  M&E plan was prepared and is  M&E plan and monitoring reports manner) being implemented 4. To what extent was the planning of  Number of planning meetings held  Minutes of meetings with regional interventions participatory with with regional and district officials and district officials and community district authorities? and communities representatives  Interviews with IPs

Evaluation Criterion 2: Efficiency

Data sources and collection Evaluation questions Indicators methods Progress achieved and comments 1. To what extent did UN agencies  Number of planning meetings held  Records of planning meetings plan together? Did the plans and documented  Programme plans developed demonstrate coherence and  Number of PUNs represented at Delivering as One? planning and coordination meetings 2. To what extent were the  Management structure was defined  Programme documents management and administrative in the Programme documents with  Progress reports

58 set up necessary and adequate to job descriptions/responsibilities  Reports of programme monitoring deliver the Joint Programme?  Management positions filled  Interviews with project management throughout duration of the team programme  Interviews with PUNs’ focal persons 3. To what extent was the JP cost  Joint procurement system  Reports of procurement effective in terms of reducing established and functioning  Monitoring reports transaction costs internally as well  Joint monitoring and reporting  Interviews with PUNs’ focal persons as externally? mechanism established and  Interviews with MDA focal persons functioning 4. Were the institutional and  Number of PUNs with staff deployed  Interview with focal persons management arrangements in the programme regions  Interviews with programme supportive to attainment of the management intended objectives? Did the PUNs position the appropriate human resource capacity to reflect the strategic orientation of the programme? 5. How efficiently has the JP  % of planned activities actually  Interviews with PUNs’ focal persons delivered its outputs and implemented  Progress reports outcomes?  % of planned budget actually spent on JP 6.1 activities 6. How did the specific JP 6.1  Number of coordination meetings  Minutes of coordination meetings organisational set up (DSM based held in DSM and in Kigoma  Interviews with programme agencies and Kigoma based  % of PUNs represented at the management and PUNs’ focal agencies) contribute or hinder coordination meetings persons effective coordination and implementation? 7. How were the funding modalities  Time taken to transfer funds from  Interviews with PUNs, used by the UN appropriate, UNDP to IPs  Interviews with MDAs and IPs including use of national systems  % of budgeted funds actually spent  Progress reports for disbursement? on JP 6.1 activities

Evaluation Criterion 3: Effectiveness

Data sources and collection Evaluation questions Indicators methods Progress achieved and comments 1. To what extent did the UN  % of planned monitoring activities  Reports of monitoring activities

59 agencies implement and monitor performed jointly  Interviews with PUNs’ focal persons interventions together?  Number of PUNs represented at joint planning meetings 2. What are the key drivers for  M&E reports achievement/ constraints?  Interviews with PUNs’ focal persons  Interviews with IPs 3. What has been the effectiveness  % of refugee population repatriated  Progress reports of the JP 6.1 with respect to  % of host community population  Interviews with communities planned outcomes and impact on accessing and benefiting from  Interviews with IPs refugees and host communities? facilities and services in the former refugee camps 4. How could JP 6.1 have been more  Progress reports effective and achieved greater  Interviews with PUNs’ focal persons impact on targeted communities?  Interviews with IPs 5. Were the programme objectives  Programme objectives are aligned  Programme documents and activities designed in such a with development objectives and  LGA development plans way that activities were able to plans of the LGAs for the refugees  Interviews with regional and district meet the objectives around camps officials transition from humanitarian assistance to sustainable development? 6. What impact has the cluster  Number of PUNs represented at  Interviews with Programme approach with identified agencies planned coordination meetings Management Team as leads in supporting Government  Minutes of coordination meetings efforts of the JP 6.1 had on  Interviews with IPs implementation arrangements as well as attainment of outcomes? 7. What factors favourably or  Interviews with PUNs adversely affected the spirit of  Progress reports Delivering as One?  Minutes of coordination meetings

Evaluation Criterion 4: Programme Outcome/Impact

Data sources and collection Evaluation questions Indicators methods Progress achieved and comments 1. What results (outputs and  Proportion of communities reporting  Interviews with IPs outcomes) has the JP 6.1 improved incomes  Focus group discussions and

60 achieved since its  Proportion of communities reporting interviews with communities commencement? improved food security  Progress reports  Number of groups trained in small scale agro-food processing  Proportion of communities and IPs reporting improved access to socials services  Proportion of IPs reporting improved management of natural resources, security  Number of LGA staff trained in planning and M&E 2. Has the programme made a  Proportion of communities reporting  Progress reports difference to the lives of host improved quality of life and security  Focus group discussions and communities? interviews with communities 3. How are impacts different  % of women, OVCs and the  Progress reports according to gender, age and disabled reporting improved access  Interviews with IPs other vulnerability category (e.g. to social services and quality of life  Focus group discussions and disability)?  % of women, OVCs and the interviews with communities disabled reporting participation in training activities

Evaluation Criterion 5: Sustainability

Evaluation questions Indicators Data sources and collection Progress achieved and comments methods 1. How sustainable is the progress  Number of IPs mainstreaming JP  Plans and reports of IPs made and achievements of the JP 6.1 activities within their plans and 6.1? budgets 2. What are the major factors which  LGAs development plans have influenced the relevance,  Interviews with IPs effectiveness, efficiency and  Minutes of meetings of PUNs sustainability of the JP 6.1?  Progress reports 3. Has there been connectedness  Time taken in effecting the transition  Project documents between the transition from  Time taken for the Programme  Progress reports humanitarian assistance to Manager to be on the ground to lead  Interviews with PUNs and IPs sustainable development? and direct the transition

61 4. What is the exit/longer term  Number of LGAs mainstreaming JP  LGAs’ development plans strategy for sustainable 6.1 activities within their  Interviews with LGA officials development? development plans and budgets 5. What approaches are the JP  Capacity development training  Progress reports PUNs taking to the building of provided  Interviews with LGA officials national capacities? How effective  % of programme budget spent on  Interviews with PUNs’ focal persons are these approaches? training and capacity development  Number of persons trained

Evaluation Criterion 6: Partnerships and Coordination

Data sources and collection Evaluation questions Indicators methods Progress achieved and comments 1. What are the key lessons learned  Reporting of monitoring from the JP 6.1 and how can they  Progress reports inform future UN, GoT and DP  Interviews with PUNs decision making processes?  Interviews with IPs 2. What factors favourably or  Reporting of monitoring adversely affected the spirit of  Progress reports Delivering as One?  Interviews with PUNs  Interviews with IPs 3. What links exist between national  Number of PUNs reporting  Interviews with PUNs and field level coordination participation in coordination (including the cluster approach)? meetings at national and field levels  Monitoring and progress reports shared between clusters and PUNs 4. Are there any critical technical  Technical staff turnover within the  Interviews with PUNs gaps in the coordination PUNs structures? 5. What impact has the cluster  Cluster members reporting sharing  Interviews with clusters leads approach had on implementation in planning, implementation and  Interviews with other PUNs arrangements as well as monitoring  Progress reports attainment of outcomes?  % of the cluster’s planned activities actually implemented  % of cluster’s planned budget actually spent

62 Evaluation Criterion 7: Cross-cutting Issues

Data sources and collection Evaluation questions Indicators methods Progress achieved and comments 1. Were cross- cutting considerations  Number of cross-cutting issues  Progress reports mainstreamed in the mainstreamed in IPs’ activities  Monitoring reports implementation of activities?  IPs’ development plans 2. To what extent did the programme  Number of planning and progress  Reports of meetings involve the host communities and review meetings held with other stakeholders in programme communities design and implementation? 3. Were the capacity development  Capacity needs assessments  Reports of capacity needs activities informed by capacity conducted assessments undertaken assessment at different levels? 4. To what extent was the local  Local context recognised and  Project design documents context with respect to Gender mainstreamed in project design Equality, Human Rights Based documents Approach, Environmental Sustainability, HIV/AIDS, Capacity Development and Results Based Management taken into consideration when the JP 6.1 was designed?

63 Appendix 4: Persons Interviewed

UN Agencies Name Organisation Position Ms. Louise Chamberlain UNDP, Dar es Salaam Deputy Country Director (Programmes) Ms. Nora Pendaeli UNDP, Dar es Salaam DGU Team Leader Mr. Audax Rutta UNDP, Dar es Salaam DGU Programme Analyst Mr. Ulf Flink UNDP, Dar es Salaam DGU Programme Analyst Mr. Dominick Madiga UNDP, Dar es Salaam Finance Associate Mr. George Otoo UNDP, Dar es Salaam Resident Coordinator’s Office Ms. Jennifer Kotta UNESCO, Dar es Salaam Programme Officer Mr. Henry Gloriex UNESCO, Dar es Salaam Planning, M&E Officer Mr. Kumbwaeli Salewi ILO, Dar es Salaam Programme Officer Mr. Daimu Mkwawa UNCDF, Dar es Salaam Programme Specialist Mr. Rapheal Laizer FAO, Dar es Salaam JP 6.1 Focal Person Mr. Gerald Runyoro FAO, Dar es Salaam Assistant FAO Representative Dr. Nemes Iriya WHO, Dar es Salaam NPO/CAH Dr. Faustine Njau WHO, Dar es Salaam NPO/MPN Dr. Ritha Njau WHO, Dar es Salaam NPO/MAL Mr. Andrea Antonelli UNIDO, Dar es Salaam Programme Officer/JP 6.1 Focal Person Ms Juliet Kabege UNIDO, Dar es Salaam Programme Officer Mr. Victor Akim UNIDO, Dars es Salaam National Consultant Mr. Marcellino Ramkishun IOM, Mwanza Programme Officer Mr. Indu Bhushan Gautam UNDP, Kigoma JP 6.1 Programme Manager Ms. Zakiya Aloyce UNDP, Kigoma JP 6.1 Cluster 3 Coordinator Mr. Michael Bisama UNDP, Kigoma UNV/Programme Associate Mr. Abebe Hankore WFP, Kigoma HSO & PRRO Coordinator (NWT) Ms Caroline Robert WFP, Kigoma Programme Assistant (NWT) Ms. Noriko Kominami UNICEF, Kigoma Chief of Field Office Ms. Penina Sangiwa UNICEF, Kigoma Education Officer Mr. Nehemiah Ntabaye UNICEF, Kigoma Child Protection Officer Ms. Bernadette Castel UNHCR, Kigoma Head of Field Office Mr. Phocas Rwenyangi UNHCR, Kigoma Associate Programme Officer Eng. Thomas Binali UNHCR, Kigoma Physical Planner/Engineer

Central Government Ministries Mr. Packshard P. Mkongwa Prime Minister’s Office – Director for Policy and Planning Regional Administration & Local Government Mr. Ebenezer Mlinga Prime Minister’s Office – Economist, Regional Administration Regional Administration & Department/JP 6.1 Focal Person Local Government Mr. Dionis Ndamgoba Ministry of Community Principal Education Officer/JP 6.1 Development, Gender & Coordinator Children Mr. Mawesi Mwiga Ministry of Education & Coordinator, Special Needs Education Vocational Training Mr. John Hizza Ministry of Education & Principal Education Officer, Technical & Vocational Training Vocational Education & Training Division Mr. M. Msellem Ministry of Home Affairs Regional Immigration Officer, Mwanza

Local Government (Regional Secretariats) Name Organisation Position Eng. Peter H. Killewo Kigoma Region Acting Regional Administrative Secretary Mr. Renatus M. Nyambwa Kigoma Region Principal Economist/JP 6.1 Focal Person Mr. Cheyo K. Mayuma Kigoma Region Regional Natural Resources Officer Ms Zilpa Michael Kisonzela Kigoma Region Regional Community Development Officer

64 Mr. S.M. Ganai Kigoma Region Regional Health Officer/HMIS Focal Person Mr. Nassor Mnambila Kagera Region Regional Administrative Secretary Mr. Pius Ngaiza Kagera Region Financial Management Officer/JP 6.1 Focal Person Mr. Cosmas Alex Kagera Region Economist Mr. Sypriani G. Muheranyi Kagera Region Senior Economist Adv. Stephen Byabato Kagera Region Legal Officer

Local Government (District Councils) Name Organisation Position Mr. John V.K. Mongella Kigoma District District Commissioner/Acting Regional Commissioner Mr. Adam A. Missawe Kigoma District Acting District Executive Director Mr. Jommo Watae Kigoma District District Planning Officer Ms. Salome K. Mboya Kigoma District Statistician Mr. Hadriano Ndayikeje Kigoma District District Lands Officer Mr. Joseph Rubuye Kigoma District Agricultural Officer Mr. John Mtokela Kigoma District Civil Technician Mr. Nicolas Daniel Kigoma District Acting Head, Lugufu Girls Secondary School

Mr. Ismahel Y.C. Msovella Kasulu District Acting District Executive Director Mr. Aristario Nteye Kasulu District DPSO Mr. B.D.J. Mujuberi Kasulu District PCO Mr. William Waziri Kasulu District District Community Development Officer Dr. Cosmas Buguzi Kasulu District Acting District Medical Officer Mr. Resspice P. Swetu Kasulu District Acting District Education Officer Mr. Simwa Poti Kasulu District Works Department Ms. Esther Ruhiga Kasulu District DCIS Mr. Scapilon Ruhula Kasulu District Mr. A. Mwakabana Kasulu District District Planning Officer Mr. Geoffrey Lusanzu Kasulu District Acting District Human Resource Officer Mr. Simon Kazzo Kasulu District District Social Welfare Officer Mr. Josephat Kafulama Kasulu District Village Fund Coordinator Mr. Dismas Shadrack Kasulu District Internal Auditor Mr. Daudi Mambo Kasulu District Acting District Technician Mr. Gerald G. Nkona Kasulu District JP 6.1 Focal Person/District Education Officer Mr. Daniel Shubi Kasulu District Principal, Kasulu Folk Development College Mr. Samuel M.B. Stephen Kasulu District Acting Head, Kabanga Special Primary School Mr. Herman L. Makeja Kasulu District Deputy Head, Kabanga Special Primary School

Mr. Muhuwa Kapangawazi Kibondo District Acting District Executive Officer Mr. Gopa G. Sedoyeka Kibondo District District Planning Officer Dr. Clement Kambarangwe Kibondo District District Medical Officer Dr. Donasiano Stephano Kibondo District Medical Doctor Ms. Anna Tutuba Kibondo District JP 6.1 Focal Person Mr. Mabeyo Bujimu Kibondo District District Education Officer Mr. Dominic Ruhamuya Kibondo District District Solicitor Mr. Masuruli Siri Kibondo District District Trade Officer Ms. Anna Gwamenyo Kibondo District Head Teacher, Mkugwa Girls High School Mr. Joram Mbogoye Kibondo District Nurse Assistant, Kisogwe Dispensary Ms Justine Ntorongo Kibondo District Community Health Assistant, Kasanda Dispensary Pili Rubati Kibondo District Senior Health Attendant, Kasanda Dispensary Mr. Apolinary Mazinda Kibondo District Busunzu Ward Councillor Mr. Saasta Seyoya Kibondo District Busunzu Ward Executive Officer Mr Felix Kabuti Kibondo District Kisogwe Village Executive Officer

Mr. Wilson S. Nyamunda Ngara District Acting District Executive Director Mr. Thomson B. Seyongwe Ngara District Ward Councillor Mr. Herman Hume Ngara District JP 6.1 Coordinator

65 Mr. F. Tindamanyire Ngara District Water Engineer Mr. Christopher Masunzu Ngara District Technician, Works Department Mr. Laurean Gration Ngara District Acting District Engineer, Works Department Mr. Adam Amon Byejwe Ngara District Procurement Officer Mr. Ghalib Mkumbwa Ngara District Economist Mr. Oswald Rujuba Ngara District Acting District Education Officer Ms. Palitha N. Cleophace Ngara District Education Statistics and Logistics Officer Mr. Emmanuel Kulwa Ngara District District Community Development Officer Mr. Pius Sentozi Ngara District Clinical Officer, Lukole Health Centre Ms. Perpetua Kasase Ngara District District Community Health Officer Mr. Jared Muhile Ngara District Headmaster, K9 High School Mr. John Nzomalarumwe Ngara District Second Master, K9 High School Ms. Evodia Oscar Ngara District Head Girl, K9 High School Mr. Simon Elias Ngara District Student, K9 High School Ms. Levina B. Katana Ngara District Head Teacher, Nakatunga Primary School Mr. Grencia K. Rwela Ngara District Special Education Officer Mr. Onespherus Muhizi Ngara District District Schools Inspector Mr. Fidelis Malimbu Ngara District Acting Council Education Officer Ms. Prisca Arnold Ngara District Ward Education Officer

Dr. Valerio Kiputa Karagwe District Acting District Executive Director Ms. Adeodata Augustine Karagwe District JP 6.1 Focal Person Mr. Silaji Hussein Karagwe District District Town Planning Officer Mr. Bonny Byarufu Karagwe District District Land and Natural Resources Officer Ms. Eunice Migire Karagwe District Acting District Education Officer Ms Ashura Kajuna Karagwe District District Community Development Officer Mr. Samuel Manumbu Karagwe District Economist Mr. Filbert Binamungu Karagwe District District Community Development Officer Ms. Edina Kabyazi Karagwe District District Community Development Officer Mr. Robert B. Bankobeza Karagwe District District Education & Technical Officer Mr. Pascal Thomas Karagwe District Principal, Karagwe District VTC Mr. Issau Bernard Karagwe District District Land Officer Mr. Renatus Gozbert Karagwe District Head Teacher, Kigando Primary School Mr. Pereus M. Kilenzi Karagwe District Head Teacher, Nyaishozi Primary School

Focus Group Discussions Site District Number of participants Ilagala Kigoma 4 executive members of the Yatakamoyo Farmers Group (1 female and 3 males) Shunga Village Kasulu 20 – village land committee including Village Executive Officer, Ward Executive Officer (5 females and 15 males) Kazilamihunda Village Kibondo 13 - village land committee including ward councillor, Village Executive Officer, Ward Executive Officer (5 females 8 males) Nakatunga Primary School Ngara 15 primary school teachers (11 females and 4 males) Nyakasimbi Village Karagwe 11 - village land committee including chairman, Ward Executive Officer, (4 females and 7 males) Nyakaiga Village Karagwe 17 - village land committee including chairman, ward councillors, Village Executive Officer (4 females and 13 males)

66 Appendix 5: Key Outputs of the Joint Programme 6.1, by District and Cluster3

District Cluster Activities/Outputs Comments Kigoma 1  Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerability Analysis (CFSVA) conducted in all districts  Value chain analysis conducted aiming to identify commodities with  Intention was to use the results of the value chain analysis on a pilot basis with potential for market creation, cross-border trade, agro-processing and selected farmers in Kigoma and Kasulu Districts to enable them to market their employment creation along the chain commodities at better prices, but this has not happened.  Establishment of food storage warehouses and agro-processing  The Yatakamoyo Farmers Group at Ilagala was provided with palm oil extraction machines to youth and farmer groups under Kilimo Kwanza equipment which was delivered in July 2010. Partial installation was done by SIDO in Kigoma, Installation of the biogas plant and solar power system for the village was supposed to be done by UNIDO. But up to the time of the evaluation, this had not been done. Equipment was still not in use and some of it had been standing outside and was showing signs of corrosion. UNIDO has only recently sent technicians to install the remaining equipment.  Preparation and distribution of crop and livestock technical  Kits were distributed nationally to extension staff, farmers and relevant ministries information kits to agricultural extension staff 2  Construction & rehabilitation of Lugufu Girls Secondary School  Lugufu Girls Secondary School started operating in April 2010 and now has enrolment of 80 pupils in Form 1 and Form 2, all boarders from neighbouring villages. All construction and rehabilitation work has been completed.  School only has 3 full-time teachers plus 2 temporary teachers to teach the entire range of secondary school subjects  Construction & rehabilitation of Lugufu Boys Secondary School  Construction and rehabilitation work at Lugufu Boys Secondary School is still under way, e.g. library. The school is not yet open for students.  Supportive supervision of LGAs by Regional HMIS Focal Person to assess HMIS data collection, completeness, quality for primary health care services  Health personnel trained on new treatment guidelines for malaria, TB, HIV/AIDS, and on maternal and child health  Supply of an ambulance and radio communication equipment for the district to improve the referral system  Support to general community health, water and sanitation, nutrition and chid protection by training district staff, creating awareness on issues, etc  Primary school teachers trained on the revised school curriculum  Implementation of new primary school curriculum faces major challenges because of large class sizes and shortages of teaching and learning materials.  In-service training given to 72 FDC and VTC instructors (40 males  Kigoma District VTC was tasked to include solar power installation as part of its and 32 females) from both public and private institutions on (i) sign curriculum in view of the critical power shortage in the region; kits purchased for

3 Comments are included only were necessary, e.g. to indicate work that is still outstanding for that activity, or in regard to the impact or sustainability of the output.

67 District Cluster Activities/Outputs Comments language (ii) preventive maintenance and (iii) solar power installation the training were handed to the centre and maintenance  Training in sign language may have been wasted. Was a 3-week workshop. All recognised that more time was needed for instructors to master sign language. But there were no funds to run at least another 2 sessions for the participants  Participants unhappy about not being given certificates of attendance and no training manuals given out 3  Construction & rehabilitation of administrative buildings and staff  New district of Uvinza is expected to become operational in FY2011/2012 houses at Lugufu for the new Uvinza District  Surveying & demarcation of village boundaries in pilot villages  Identification and demarcation of boundaries in pilot villages has been done. Actual land use planning within the village boundaries has not started; expected to start in FY2011/2012 at Lugufu which is the new district centre and in order to start re-populating the former refugee camps. But district does not yet have a Town Planner  Procurement of equipment for land surveying and land use planning  Training on environmental legislation and EIA for regional, district,  Council now has an Environmental Management Officer to oversee environmental municipal departmental heads and senior managers management issues including EIAs. After training on environmental management, staff were supposed to prepare district environmental action plan, but not done due to lack of funds  Regional and district council staff trained in gender mainstreaming  Gender training has raised awareness among staff on the need for inclusion of and budgeting gender indicators in local government budgeting and planning processes  District officials, ward and village executive officers and village elders  80 officials, officers and elders were trained trained on migration management and refugee protection  Building capacity of border control authorities through the provision of  Border control activities include joint training between immigration officers and equipment, rehabilitation of structures and facilities police, joint meetings with border authorities in neighbouring countries, provision of equipment (computers, passport and finger print readers, migration data sharing, etc), installation of solar power, refurbishment of buildings, etc. Adverts on dangers of human trafficking produced.

Kasulu 1  Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerability Analysis (CFSVA)  District Council felt that the PUNs should have also rehabilitated main roads that conducted in all districts were damaged by heavy trucks serving the refugee camps in the past. Instead, the UN focussed on access roads to its facilities.  Value chain analysis conducted aiming to identify commodities with  Intention was to use the results of the value chain analysis on a pilot basis with potential for market creation, cross-border trade, agro-processing and selected farmers in Kigoma and Kasulu Districts to enable them to market their employment creation along the chain commodities at better prices, but this has not happened.  Preparation and distribution of crop and livestock technical  Kits were distributed nationally to extension staff, farmers and relevant ministries information kits to agricultural extension staff 2  Construction and rehabilitation of agreed structures at Muyovosi  Muyovosi health centre is not yet operational. It still needs a laboratory, beds for health centre completed – 2 wards, ablution blocks, mortuary, the two wards, equipment, before it can be registered with the Ministry of Health. PMTCT block, pharmacy, staff house and OPD. Water supply District Council had not included these in its 2011/2012 budget. Has no perimeter rehabilitated fence for security or electricity or ambulance for referrals.

68 District Cluster Activities/Outputs Comments  Health centre will also serve the adjacent secondary school under construction and rehabilitation  Co-educational high school with boarding facilities at Muyovosi is  The school is expected to open in time for the 2011/2012 school year near completion  Construction of a dining hall, dormitories and latrines at Kasangezi  This is a pre-existing community school at the site of a former refugee transit Girl’s Secondary School near completion camp which has been supported by the JP 6.1  The new structures will enable it to become a fully-fledged boarding school for girls.  Supportive supervision of LGAs by Regional HMIS Focal Person to assess HMIS data collection, completeness, quality for primary health care services  Health personnel trained on new treatment guidelines for malaria, TB, HIV/AIDS, and on maternal and child health  Supply of an ambulance and radio communication equipment for the district to improve the referral system  Support to general community health, water and sanitation, nutrition  District has identified 2,648 MVCs in 48 wards and is working with NGOs to and chid protection by training district staff, creating awareness on provide support, including paying fees for those in secondary school issues, etc  Sanitation programme has covered about 10 villages, including  Next FY2011/2012, district council plans to fund extension of WASH programme latrines, hand washing facilities to another 15 villages  45 tutors in local teacher training colleges trained on special needs  College tutors are now expected to cascade awareness of children with special education using the inclusive approach needs to their students/trainee teachers in the colleges  Kabanga Special Primary School provided with teaching/learning  Kabanga Special Primary School is an integrated school with 194 pupils with equipment for children with special needs, e.g. Braille machines, special needs and 510 without special needs. Special needs pupils include 73 hearing aids, lotions for albinos, etc albinos, 31 blind pupils, 45 deaf, 27 physically disabled and 18 intellectually impaired pupils.  School enrols special needs children from other districts in the region – e.g. 28 of the children are from Kibondo District  More teachers needed who are qualified in special needs education – currently school has 6 qualified teachers for 194 pupils whereas the teacher-pupil ratio should be 1:5  School also houses albino infants and their guardians/mothers for their own security and safety.  Primary school teachers trained on the revised school curriculum  Implementation of new primary school curriculum faces major challenges because of large class sizes and shortages of teaching and learning materials.  In-service training given to 72 FDC and VTC instructors (40 males  Kigoma District VTC was tasked to include solar power installation as part of its and 32 females) from both public and private institutions on (i) sign curriculum in view of the critical power shortage in the region; kits purchased for language (ii) preventive maintenance and (iii) solar power installation the training were handed to the centre and maintenance  Training in sign language may have been wasted. Was a 3-week workshop. All recognised that more time was needed for instructors to master sign language.

69 District Cluster Activities/Outputs Comments But there were no funds to run at least another 2 sessions for the participants  Participants unhappy about not being given certificates of attendance and no training manuals given out  Kasulu Folk Development Centre has had solar power installed in its  FDC previously hired generators from town when it needed power; fuel was a office, two staff houses, computer laboratory, carpentry workshop and major cost item. sewing room 3  Surveying & demarcation of village boundaries in 5 pilot villages such  Data on land survey has been collected but the mapping software was apparently as Shunga Village corrupted. District Council still has to purchase new software   After completion of land use planning, District Council plans to re-populate the area in order to bring the people closer to the services at Muyovosi  Training on environmental legislation and EIA for regional, district,  After training on environmental management, staff were supposed to prepare and municipal heads of departments and senior staff district environmental action plan, but not done due to lack of funds  Council now has an Environmental Management Officer to oversee environmental management issues including EIAs  Regional and district council staff trained in gender mainstreaming  Gender training has raised awareness among staff on the need for inclusion of and budgeting gender indicators in local government budgeting and planning processes  District officials, ward and village executive officers and village elders  40 officials, officers and elders were trained trained on migration management and refugee protection  Building capacity of border control authorities through the provision of  Border control activities include joint training between immigration officers and equipment, rehabilitation of facilities police, joint meetings with border authorities in neighbouring countries, provision of equipment (computers, passport and finger print readers, migration data sharing, etc), installation of solar power, refurbishment of buildings, etc. Adverts on dangers of human smuggling produced.

Kibondo 1  Comprehensive Food Security and Vulnerability Analysis (CFSVA) conducted in all districts  Value chain analysis conducted aiming to identify commodities with potential for market creation, cross-border trade, agro-processing and employment creation along the chain  Preparation and distribution of crop and livestock technical  Kits were distributed nationally to extension staff, farmers and relevant ministries information kits to agricultural extension staff 2  Supportive supervision of LGAs by Regional HMIS Focal Person to assess HMIS data collection, completeness, quality for primary health care services  Health personnel trained on new treatment guidelines for malaria, TB, HIV/AIDS, MCH, and community IMCI  Supply of an ambulance and radio communication equipment for the district to improve the referral system

70 District Cluster Activities/Outputs Comments  Support to general community health, water and sanitation, nutrition  WASH situation is still very poor in the district – 63% of the population have and chid protection by training district staff, creating awareness on access to safe drinking water and 59% have access proper sanitation. issues, etc  Teachers and guardians trained on formation and running of  Pupils at Nyaruyoba and Kasaka Primary Schools have been organised into “TUSEME” clubs in local primary schools “TUSEME” (Speak Out) clubs which give them a forum to discus problems and issues affecting children and child rights. A child protection programme is being sponsored on the district radio station, Radio Kwizera Kibondo  Construction and rehabilitation of three dormitories, dining room and  District has 110 special needs children enrolled in regular schools and another 28 perimeter wall under way at Nengo Special Needs Primary School at Kabanga School in Kasulu District  There are only 3 qualified special needs teachers in the district; will be re- deployed to Nengo; another 4 are under training and are contracted to work in the district  Construction and rehabilitation of Kisongwe Dispensary completed  Kisongwe Dispensary only the OPD is now open and serves four villages with a and OPD section operational since November 2010; also provided population of about 20,000. Before it opened, the nearest health facility was 10 with staff houses, furniture, solar power, maternity and paediatric km away. Dispensary has started implementing the community Integrated wings, equipment, and an ambulance Management of Childhood Illnesses (IMCI)  Dispensary currently receives about 40 outpatients per day  Construction and rehabilitation of Kasanda Dispensary completed  Kasanda Dispensary is fully operational and services provided include MCH including new building, staff housing, equipment and furniture, solar power installed; two boreholes drilled and water supply installed and available to the surrounding community  Installation of solar lighting to wards and improved water supply at  Solar system at Kibondo District Hospital was supposed to provide lighting to Kibondo District Hospital wards, but has apparently been operating with limited capacity; hospital officials and District Council seemed unconcerned about the problem or who should be responsible for rectifying it.  Mkugwa Girls High School built at the site of a former primary school  Mkugwa Girls High School provided with 3 laboratories and science kits, 2 for refugees, is a boarding school and planned to focus on science libraries, solar power, staff houses and classroom rehabilitated. But laboratories subjects in future. Opened in April 2009 not in use because the school has no science teachers. Because of national enrolment policy for Form 5, only 2 out of the 105 students are from within Kibondo District.  Came first out of the nine high schools in Kigoma Region with its first chort of ACSEE examinations in February 2011  In-service training given to 72 FDC and VTC instructors (40 males  Kigoma District VTC was tasked to include solar power installation as part of its and 32 females) from both public and private institutions on (i) sign curriculum in view of the critical power shortage in the region; kits purchased for language (ii) preventive maintenance and (iii) solar power installation the training were handed to the centre and maintenance  Training in sign language may have been wasted. Was a 3-week workshop. All recognised that more time was needed for instructors to master sign language. But there were no funds to run at least another 2 sessions for the participants  Participants unhappy about not being given certificates of attendance and no training manuals given out

71 District Cluster Activities/Outputs Comments 3  Training on environmental legislation and EIA for regional, district,  After training on environmental management, staff were supposed to prepare municipal heads of departments and senior managers district environmental action plan, but not done due to lack of funds  Council now has an Environmental Management Officer to oversee environmental management issues including EIAs  District officials, ward and village executive officers and village elders  40 officials, officers and elders were trained trained on migration management and refugee protection  Building capacity of border control authorities through the provision of  Border control activities include joint training between immigration officers and equipment, rehabilitation of facilities police, joint meetings with border authorities in neighbouring countries, provision of equipment (computers, passport and finger print readers, migration data sharing, etc), installation of solar power, refurbishment of buildings, etc. Adverts on dangers of human smuggling produced.  7 pilot villages such as Kazilamihunda Village assisted with survey  Plan has already been registered with the Commissioner for Lands. and demarcation of their land boundaries. Identification of land uses  The exercise is helping to reduce land conflicts between farmers and pastoralists within the village boundaries also done and between Kazilamihunda Village and Kanembwa National Service

Ngara 1  Preparation and distribution of crop and livestock technical  Kits were distributed nationally to extension staff, farmers and relevant ministries information kits to agricultural extension staff  Value chain analysis conducted aiming to identify commodities with potential for market creation, cross-border trade, agro-processing and employment creation along the chain 2  Construction & rehabilitation of buildings at K9 High School, the  Involved rehabilitation/construction of 9 dormitories and beds for male (5) and former residential site of a Norwegian NGO that was working with female (4) students, classrooms, dining room and kitchen, etc refugees. Opened in April 2009 and is the second high school in the  JP 6.1 also provided solar lighting, water supply, toilets, 4 computers and a printer district  Two laboratories built but not used because of lack of science teachers; library has no books  Current enrolment stands at 291, of whom 26 are from Ngara District  The school experiences occasional water shortages because of limited pumping capacity from the district council’s supply source. Laboratories not yet in use because there are no science teachers. New hostels have been completed but not yet in use because there needs a separation wall or fence between the boys and girls dormitories; students still living in old buildings  Primary school teachers from 20 wards trained on the new child-  Implementation of new primary school curriculum faces major challenges because centred curriculum. of large class sizes and shortages of teaching and learning materials.  Ward and district education officers trained on gender, counselling,  Ward education officers are supposed to cascade the training they receive down and on the formation of “TUSEME” clubs for pupils. to the teachers and the community  Teaching and learning materials (e.g. one Braille machine) provided to the two special needs schools in the district  Construction and rehabilitation of Lukole Health Centre – OPD  Work at Lukole Health Centre included new kitchen, dining room and laundry, staff already operational and serves some 10,000 people from houses, wards and procurement of 50 beds and mattresses, ablution blocks for neighbouring communities, attending to about 30 out-patients per day the wards, incinerator, solar power, rehabilitation of water supply system and

72 District Cluster Activities/Outputs Comments additional water points for the surrounding community  The former refugee camp has been re-populated and some 320 newly resettled families are benefiting from the rehabilitated water supply system  Health personnel trained on new treatment guidelines for malaria, TB, HIV/AIDS, and on maternal and child health  Supply of an ambulance and radio communication equipment for the district to improve the referral system  Support to general community health, nutrition, water and sanitation  On average, about 69% of the district’s population has access to safe drinking and chid protection by training district staff, creating awareness on water, but major constraint is distance to water points, especially in rural areas. issues, etc  Only about 50% of primary schools have adequate sanitation facilities 3  Building capacity of border control authorities through the provision of  Border control activities include joint training between immigration officers and equipment, rehabilitation of facilities police, joint meetings with border authorities in neighbouring countries, provision of equipment (computers, passport and finger print readers, migration data sharing, etc), installation of solar power, refurbishment of buildings, etc. Adverts on dangers of human smuggling produced.  Illegal immigrants are continuing to come, but mainly for employment or to access health services within the district  District officials, ward and village executive officers and village elders  80 officials, officers and elders were trained trained on migration management and refugee protection  Support given for land use planning, demarcation of village  Training on the Land Act included resolution of land disputes and legal boundaries in pilot villages, training of village land committees and requirements for village land ownership. But covered only 4 out of the 73 villages ward land tribunals on the Village Land Act e.g. in Lusumo Ward in the district  5 pilot villages have been assisted to develop their plans  Training given to district, ward and village officials on gender  Gender training has raised awareness among staff on the need for inclusion of mainstreaming and planning gender indicators in local government budgeting and planning processes

Karagwe 1  Preparation and distribution of crop and livestock technical  Kits were distributed nationally to extension staff, farmers and relevant ministries information kits to agricultural extension staff  Value chain analysis conducted aiming to identify commodities with potential for market creation, cross-border trade, agro-processing and employment creation along the chain 2  Health personnel trained on new treatment guidelines for malaria, TB, HIV/AIDS, Provider-Initiated HIV Counselling and Testing (PITC), and on maternal and child health  Equipment and supplies for health facilities including an ambulance, communications equipment, MCH equipment and supplies, nutritional support for about 120 eligible TB/AIDS patients,  Supply of an ambulance and radio communication equipment for the district to improve the referral system

73 District Cluster Activities/Outputs Comments  Support to general community health, water and sanitation, nutrition and chid protection by training district staff, creating awareness on issues, etc  Primary school teachers trained on the revised school curriculum  Implementation of new primary school curriculum faces major challenges because of large class sizes and shortages of teaching and learning materials.  300 desks given to the district for distribution to 10 primary schools  The 300 desks were distributed to 10 primary schools, 30 per school, but there is still a large shortage of 21,813 for the district’s 211 primary schools. Local contractors were used to produce the desks using a common model/sample provided by the district council  Tools and equipment for the district’s four post-primary VTCs and the  VTC equipment included sewing machines for dressing making groups; planes, Karagwe District VTC clamps and saws for carpentry and joinery classes  Karagwe District VTC received 2 PCs, UPS, printer, a projector and screen for its computer laboratory, 2 electric irons, 5 sewing machines, desk and chair for the principal’s office, etc 3  Building capacity of border control authorities, provision of equipment,  Border control activities include joint training between immigration officers and rehabilitation of facilities police, joint meetings with border authorities in neighbouring countries, provision of equipment (computers, passport and finger print readers, migration data sharing, etc), installation of solar power systems, refurbishment of buildings, etc. Adverts on dangers of human smuggling produced.  Training for 148 village leaders and ward tribunals on resolution of  Boundary plans for Nyakasimbi and Nyakaiga have been prepared and are to be land disputes and laws governing surveying of boundaries in 4 pilot submitted to relevant authorities for approval and registration. Thereafter, detailed villages. land use mapping within the new township areas will be undertaken.  Training of village land committees, village leaders, ward executive officers and extension workers on participatory land use planning – covered 4 villages  Identification of boundaries and existing land uses and the preparation of township plans in 3 pilot villages of Nyaishozi, Nyakasimbi and Nyakaiga  Training of village leaders from 3 villages on gender mainstreaming in  Gender training has raised awareness among staff on the need for inclusion of their development plans gender indicators in local government budgeting and planning processes  Training of village and ward leaders in planning, monitoring and  The training exposed local leaders to local government planning, reporting and evaluation of development projects monitoring systems  Training of staff from RAS and districts on planning, environmental  Gender training has raised awareness among staff on the need for inclusion of legislation, EIA, M&E and gender mainstreaming gender indicators in local government budgeting and planning processes

74